Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Objective</h3><p>To define confounding bias in difference‐in‐difference studies and compare regression‐ and matching‐based estimators designed to correct bias due to observed confounders.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Data sources</h3><p>We simulated data from linear models that incorporated different confounding relationships: time‐invariant covariates with a time‐varying effect on the outcome, time‐varying covariates with a constant effect on the outcome, and time‐varying covariates with a time‐varying effect on the outcome. We considered a simple setting that is common in the applied literature: treatment is introduced at a single time point and there is no unobserved treatment effect heterogeneity.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Study design</h3><p>We compared the bias and root mean squared error of treatment effect estimates from six model specifications, including simple linear regression models and matching techniques.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Data collection</h3><p>Simulation code is provided for replication.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Principal findings</h3><p>Confounders in difference‐in‐differences are covariates that change differently over time in the treated and comparison group or have a time‐varying effect on the outcome. When such a confounding variable is measured, appropriately adjusting for this confounder (ie, including the confounder in a regression model that is consistent with the causal model) can provide unbiased estimates with optimal SE. However, when a time‐varying confounder is affected by treatment, recovering an unbiased causal effect using difference‐in‐differences is difficult.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>Confounding in difference‐in‐differences is more complicated than in cross‐sectional settings, from which techniques and intuition to address observed confounding cannot be imported wholesale. Instead, analysts should begin by postulating a causal model that relates covariates, both time‐varying and those with time‐varying effects on the outcome, to treatment. This causal model will then guide the specification of an appropriate analytical model (eg, using regression or matching) that can produce unbiased treatment effect estimates. We emphasize the importance of thoughtful incorporation of covariates to address confounding bias in difference‐in‐difference studies.</p></section>

A Comparison of Different Approaches for Estimating Cross-Lagged Effects from a Causal Inference Perspective

Thinking clearly about time-invariant confounders in cross-lagged panel models: A guide for choosing a statistical model from a causal inference perspective.

How to Deal With Reverse Causality Using Panel Data? Recommendations for Researchers Based on a Simulation Study

A Critique of the Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model

Using Instrumental Variables to Measure Causation over Time in Cross-Lagged Panel Models

Causal models for longitudinal and panel data: a survey

Causal inference under over-simplified longitudinal causal models

On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data

A Practical Guide to Counterfactual Estimators for Causal Inference with Time-Series Cross-Sectional Data

On the Importance of Considering Concurrent Effects in Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Modelling: Example Analysis of Bullying and Internalising Problems

A Bracketing Relationship between Difference-in-Differences and Lagged-Dependent-Variable Adjustment

A Cross-Moment Approach for Causal Effect Estimation

A Comparative Study of Design-Based and Analysis-Based Approaches to Causal Inference with Observational Data

Causal inference with marginal structural modeling for longitudinal data in laparoscopic surgery: A technical note

CAUSAL INFERENCE FOR CONTINUOUS-TIME PROCESSES WHEN COVARIATES ARE OBSERVED ONLY AT DISCRETE TIMES

Confounding and regression adjustment in difference‐in‐differences studies

On the Differences between General Cross-Lagged Panel Model and Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model: Interpretation of Cross-Lagged Parameters and Model Choice

Doubly Robust Identification for Causal Panel Data Models

A Tutorial on Causal Inference in Longitudinal Data With Time-Varying Confounding Using G-Estimation

Comparing Causal Inference Methods for Point Exposures with Missing Confounders: A Simulation Study

Inference with cross-lagged effects-Problems in time