Abstract:In matched observational studies, the inferred causal conclusions pretending that matching has taken into account all confounding can be sensitive to unmeasured confounding. In such cases, a sensitivity analysis is often conducted, which investigates whether the observed association between treatment and outcome is due to effects caused by the treatment or it is due to hidden confounding. In general, a sensitivity analysis tries to infer the minimum amount of hidden biases needed in order to explain away the observed association between treatment and outcome, assuming that the treatment has no effect. If the needed bias is large, then the treatment is likely to have significant effects. The Rosenbaum sensitivity analysis is a modern approach for conducting sensitivity analysis for matched observational studies. It investigates what magnitude the maximum of the hidden biases from all matched sets needs to be in order to explain away the observed association, assuming that the treatment has no effect. However, such a sensitivity analysis can be overly conservative and pessimistic, especially when the investigators believe that some matched sets may have exceptionally large hidden biases. In this paper, we generalize Rosenbaum's framework to conduct sensitivity analysis on quantiles of hidden biases from all matched sets, which are more robust than the maximum. Moreover, we demonstrate that the proposed sensitivity analysis on all quantiles of hidden biases is simultaneously valid and is thus a free lunch added to the conventional sensitivity analysis. The proposed approach works for general outcomes, general matched studies and general test statistics. Finally, we demonstrate that the proposed sensitivity analysis also works for bounded null hypotheses as long as the test statistic satisfies certain properties. An R package implementing the proposed method is also available online.

Sensitivity Analysis in Unconditional Quantile Effects

Unconditional quantile partial effects via conditional quantile regression

Unconditional effects of general policy interventions

Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Using Quantile Regression with Interactive Fixed Effects

Generic Inference on Quantile and Quantile Effect Functions for Discrete Outcomes

Extreme Quantile Treatment Effects under Endogeneity: Evaluating Policy Effects for the Most Vulnerable Individuals

Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding in the Estimation of Marginal Causal Effects

Quantile‐Based Test for Heterogeneous Treatment Effects

Evaluating the Impact of Regulatory Policies on Social Welfare in Difference-in-Difference Settings

Sensitivity Analysis for Quantiles of Hidden Biases in Matched Observational Studies

Testing for Quantile Sample Selection

Distributional counterfactual analysis in high-dimensional setup

Sharp Sensitivity Analysis for Inverse Propensity Weighting via Quantile Balancing

Evaluating Marginal Policy Changes and the Average Effect of Treatment for Individuals at the Margin

Conflating marginal and conditional treatment effects: Comments on 'Assessing the performance of population adjustment methods for anchored indirect comparisons: A simulation study'

Treatment Effect Quantiles in Stratified Randomized Experiments and Matched Observational Studies

A Risk-Ratio-Based Marginal Sensitivity Model for Causal Effects in Observational Studies

Quantile regression with censoring and sample selection

Counterfactual Sensitivity and Robustness

Differential Quantile-Based Sensitivity in Discontinuous Models

Quantile Models with Endogeneity