The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Estimation of Causal Effects via Principal Stratification When Some Outcomes are Truncated by “Death”
Abstract
The topic of “truncation by death” in randomized experiments arises in many fields, such as medicine, economics and education. Traditional approaches addressing this issue ignore the fact that the outcome after the truncation is neither “censored” nor “missing,” but should be treated as being defined on an extended sample space. Using an educational example to illustrate, we will outline here a formulation for tackling this issue, where we call the outcome “truncated by death” because there is no hidden value of the outcome variable masked by the truncating event. We first formulate the principal stratification ( Frangakis & Rubin, 2002 ) approach, and we then derive large sample bounds for causal effects within the principal strata, with or without various identification assumptions. Extensions are then briefly discussed.
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
Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies
Rubin, D. B. (1974) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0037350 · Cited by 9,436
Self-citationStatistical Analysis with Missing Data
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781119013563 · Cited by 8,473
Self-citationStatistics and Causal Inference
Holland, P. W. (1986) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478354 · Cited by 5,293
Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables
Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1996.10476902 · Cited by 4,230
Self-citationThe interpretation of interaction in contingency tables
Simpson, E. H. (1951) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1951.tb00088.x · Cited by 2,301 · cited 1×
“This same issue of comparing different subgroup of subjects arises with Simpson’s paradox (Simpson, 1951, Wainer, 1999).”
BackgroundRandomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test Comment
Rubin, D. B. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2287653 · Cited by 1,368
Self-citation
Cited by
Administrative Records Mask Racially Biased Policing
KNOX, D., LOWE, W., & MUMMOLO, J. (2020) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055420000039 · Cited by 314
The estimands framework: a primer on the ICH E9(R1) addendum
Kahan, B. C., Hindley, J., Edwards, M., Cro, S., & Morris, T. P. (2024) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-076316 · Cited by 180
Swanson, S. A., Hernán, M. A., Miller, M., Robins, J. M., & Richardson, T. S. (2018) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2018.1434530 · Cited by 93
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, J. L., & Rubin, D. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 353-368
- ISSN
- 1076-9986 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-1054
- OpenAlex
- W2064556123
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 4.56
- 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: Estimation of Causal Effects via Principal Stratification When Some Outcomes are Truncated by “Death”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3102/10769986028004353
- The paper
- Zhang, J. L., & Rubin, D. B. (2003). Estimation of Causal Effects via Principal Stratification When Some Outcomes are Truncated by “Death”. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986028004353
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.
