The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Handbook on Impact Evaluation: Quantitative Methods and Practices
Open accessAbstract
This handbook "provides a practice and comprehensive overview of the latest methods for evaluating public programs, targeted toward researchers as well as policy makers. This book bridges the latest econometric research on impact evaluation with the field experience of program officials and evaluators. Experimental and nonexperimental approaches for designing and evaluating programs are covered, as well as methods for examinig distributional and structural impacts of programs. Discussions and recent case studies are presented for each chapter that draw on the practical experience of progam officials and researchers in implementing different initiatives, including policies on schooling, microfinance, health, and infrastructure." -- Back cover.
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
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
SOME PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING
Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x · Cited by 6,238
Shadow Prices, Market Wages, and Labor Supply
Heckman, J. (1974) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913937 · Cited by 1,852
Cited by
Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework
Reed, M. S., Ferré, M., Martin-Ortega, J., Blanche, R., Lawford-Rolfe, R., Dallimer, M., & Holden, J. (2021) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104147 · Cited by 319
Ogutu, S. O., Okello, J. J., & Otieno, D. J. (2014) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.06.011 · Cited by 262
‘Naming and shaming for conservation: evidence from the Brazilian Amazon’
Cisneros, E., Zhou, S. L., & Börner, J. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136402 · Cited by 132
Löbner, M., Pabst, A., Stein, J., Dorow, M., Matschinger, H., Luppa, M., Maroß, A., Kersting, A., König, H.-H., & Riedel-Heller, S. G. (2018) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2018.06.008 · Cited by 72
Ashton, R. A., Prosnitz, D., Andrada, A., Herrera, S., & Yé, Y. (2020) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/s12936-020-03158-z · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Khandker, S., B. Koolwal, G., & Samad, H.
- Venue
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics
- Publisher
- The World Bank
- Published
- 2009-10-13
- OpenAlex
- W1859686506
- Cited by
- 485
- References
- 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Handbook on Impact Evaluation: Quantitative Methods and Practices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1596/978-0-8213-8028-4
- The paper
- Khandker, S., B. Koolwal, G., & Samad, H. (2009). Handbook on Impact Evaluation: Quantitative Methods and Practices. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8028-4
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.