Conventional causal estimands, such as the average treatment effect (ATE), reflect how the mean outcome in a population or subpopulation would change if all units received treatment versus control. Real-world policy changes, however, are often incremental, changing the treatment status for only a small segment of the population who are at or near "the margin of participation." To capture this notion, two parallel lines of inquiry have developed in economics and in statistics and epidemiology that define, identify, and estimate what we call interventional effects. In this article, we bridge these two strands of literature by defining interventional effect (IE) as the per capita effect of a treatment intervention on an outcome of interest, and marginal interventional effect (MIE) as its limit when the size of the intervention approaches zero. The IE and MIE can be viewed as the unconditional counterparts of the policy-relevant treatment effect (PRTE) and marginal PRTE (MPRTE) proposed in the economics literature. However, different from PRTE and MPRTE, IE and MIE are defined without reference to a latent index model, and, as we show, can be identified either under unconfoundedness or through the use of instrumental variables. For both scenarios, we show that MIEs are typically identified without the strong positivity assumption required of the ATE, highlight several "stylized interventions" that may be of particular interest in policy analysis, discuss several parametric and semiparametric estimation strategies, and illustrate the proposed methods with an empirical example.
翻译:然而,现实世界的政策变化往往是递增的,只改变了处于或接近“参与幅度”的一小部分人口的治疗状况。 为了抓住这个概念,经济学和统计以及流行病学方面出现了两条平行的调查线,界定、确定和估计我们所称的干预效应。在本条中,我们通过将干预效应(IE)定义为治疗干预干预对利益结果的人均效应和边际干预效应(MIE)作为干预规模接近零时的限度来弥补人口或亚人口群体的平均结果如何变化。 IE和MIE可被视为经济学文献中提议的与政策相关的治疗效应(PRTE)和边缘PRTE(MPRTE)的无条件对应方。然而,与PRTE和MPRTE、IE和MIE不同的是,我们定义了这两个文献,没有参考潜在指数模型模型,而且正如我们所显示的那样,在不按某种假设性假设性假设性的情况下,我们通常会以某种不成熟的假设性的方法来解释。