The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Covariate Balancing Propensity Score
Abstract
Summary: The propensity score plays a central role in a variety of causal inference settings. In particular, matching and weighting methods based on the estimated propensity score have become increasingly common in the analysis of observational data. Despite their popularity and theoretical appeal, the main practical difficulty of these methods is that the propensity score must be estimated. Researchers have found that slight misspecification of the propensity score model can result in substantial bias of estimated treatment effects. We introduce covariate balancing propensity score (CBPS) methodology, which models treatment assignment while optimizing the covariate balance. The CBPS exploits the dual characteristics of the propensity score as a covariate balancing score and the conditional probability of treatment assignment. The estimation of the CBPS is done within the generalized method-of-moments or empirical likelihood framework. We find that the CBPS dramatically improves the poor empirical performance of propensity score matching and weighting methods reported in the literature. We also show that the CBPS can be extended to other important settings, including the estimation of the generalized propensity score for non-binary treatments and the generalization of experimental estimates to a target population. Open source software is available for implementing the methods proposed.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects
ROSENBAUM, P. R., & RUBIN, D. B. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 · Cited by 31,241
Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators
Hansen, L. P. (1982) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912775 · Cited by 13,467
Hainmueller, J. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr025 · Cited by 6,026
Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology
Robins, J. M., Hernán, M. Á., & Brumback, B. (2000) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-200009000-00011 · Cited by 5,581
Matching Methods for Causal Inference: A Review and a Look Forward
Stuart, E. A. (2010) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/09-sts313 · Cited by 5,478
Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985) · The American Statistician · doi:10.2307/2683903 · Cited by 4,774
A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe
Horvitz, D. G., & Thompson, D. J. (1952) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1952.10483446 · Cited by 4,293
Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference
Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpl013 · Cited by 4,205
Self-citationMatching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator
Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1998) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-937x.00044 · Cited by 3,807
Cited by
Why Propensity Scores Should Not Be Used for Matching
King, G., & Nielsen, R. (2019) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1017/pan.2019.11 · Cited by 1,706
Synthetic Difference-in-Differences
Arkhangelsky, D., Athey, S., Hirshberg, D. A., Imbens, G. W., & Wager, S. (2021) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20190159 · Cited by 1,518
Balancing, Regression, Difference-In-Differences and Synthetic Control Methods: A Synthesis
Doudchenko, N., & Imbens, G. (2016) · doi:10.3386/w22791 · Cited by 410
Stable weights that balance covariates for estimation with incomplete outcome data
Zubizarreta, J. R. (2015) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2015.1023805 · Cited by 369
A Survey of Learning Causality with Data: Problems and Methods
Guo, R., Cheng, L., Li, J., Hahn, P. R., & Liu, H. (2021) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3397269 · Cited by 362
Metadata
- Authors
- Imai, K., & Ratkovic, M.
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-07-03
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243-263
- ISSN
- 1369-7412 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9868
- OpenAlex
- W2132324013
- Cited by
- 1,315
- References
- 73
- FWCI
- 22.37
- 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: Covariate Balancing Propensity Score. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/rssb.12027
- The paper
- Imai, K., & Ratkovic, M. (2014). Covariate Balancing Propensity Score. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssb.12027
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.