Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,776

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions

Imbens, G.·2000·Biometrika

Abstract

Estimation of average treatment effects in observational studies often requires adjustment for differences in pre-treatment variables. If the number of pre-treatment variables is large, standard covariance adjustment methods are often inadequate. Rosenbaum & Rubin (1983) propose an alternative method for adjusting for pre-treatment variables for the binary treatment case based on the so-called propensity score. Here an extension of the propensity score methodology is proposed that allows for estimation of average casual effects with multi-valued treatments.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biomet/87.3.706

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,776

Metadata

Authors
Imbens, G.
Venue
Biometrika
Published
2000-09-01
Volume
87
Issue
3
Pages
706-710
ISSN
  • 0006-3444 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3510
OpenAlex
W3122843734
Cited by
1,776
References
0
FWCI
17.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/biomet/87.3.706
The paper
Imbens, G. (2000). The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions. Biometrika. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/87.3.706

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.