Since the initial work by Ashenfelter and Card in 1985, the use of difference-in-differences (DID) study design has become widespread. However, as pointed out in the literature, this popular quasi-experimental design also suffers estimation bias and inference bias, which could be very serious in some circumstances. In this study, we start by investigating potential sources of systemic bias from the DID design. Via analyzing their impact on statistical estimation and inference, we propose a remedy -- a permutational detrending (PD) strategy -- to overcome the challenges in both the estimation bias and the inference bias. We prove that the proposed PD DID method provides unbiased point estimates, confidence interval estimates, and significance tests. We illustrate its statistical proprieties using simulation experiments. We demonstrate its practical utility by applying it to the clinical data EASE (Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment) and the social-economical data CPS (Current Population Survey). We discuss the strengths and limitations of the proposed approach.
翻译:自1985年Ashenfelter和Card的最初工作以来,差异研究设计的使用变得十分普遍,然而,正如文献指出的,这种流行的准实验设计也存在估计偏差和推论偏差,在某些情况下可能非常严重。我们从研究开始,首先调查DAD设计中潜在的系统偏差来源。我们通过分析其对统计估计和推论的影响,提出一种补救办法 -- -- 一种调和(PD)战略 -- -- 以克服估计偏差和推断偏差方面的挑战。我们证明,拟议的PDDDDD方法提供了公正的点估计、信任间隔估计和意义测试。我们用模拟实验来说明其统计特性。我们通过将其应用于临床数据EASE(对植物环境的便利方法)和社会-经济数据CPS(当前人口调查),来证明其实用性。我们讨论了拟议方法的长处和局限性。我们讨论了拟议方法的长处和局限性。