双重差分模型介绍及其应用

被引:91
作者
叶芳
王燕
机构
[1] 北京大学公共卫生学院
关键词
结局变量; 观测值; 不同时点; 估计量; 差分; 干预组; 测定值; 衰分; 双重差分估计; 双重差分模型; 综列数据;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
O212.1 [一般数理统计];
学科分类号
摘要
<正>双重差分模型(difference-in-difference,DID)近年来多用于计量经济学中对于公共政策或项目实施效果的定量评估。通常大范围的公共政策有别于普通科研性研究,难以保证对于政策实施组和对照组在样本分配上的完全随机。非随机分配政策实施组和对照组的试验称为自然试验(natural trial),此类试验存在较显著的特点,即不同组间样本在政策实施前可能存在事前差异,仅通过单一前后对比或横向对比的分析方法会忽略这种差异,继而导致对政策实施效果的有偏估计。DID模型正是基于自然试验得到的数据,通过建
引用
收藏
页码:131 / 134
页数:4
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] 城乡差分与内外之别:流动人口社会保障研究
    杨菊华
    [J]. 人口研究, 2011, 35 (05) : 8 - 25
  • [2] 非吸烟孕妇被动吸烟干预措施效果评价
    杨练
    毛正中
    [J]. 中国慢性病预防与控制, 2010, 18 (03) : 226 - 228
  • [3] 中国农村税费改革的政策效果:基于双重差分模型的估计
    周黎安
    陈烨
    [J]. 经济研究, 2005, (08) : 44 - 53
  • [4] Impact of Medicaid Copayments on Patients With Cancer: Lessons for Medicaid Expansion Under Health Reform[J] . Sujha Subramanian.Medical Care . 2011 (9)
  • [5] An extension in eligibility for free primary care and avoidable hospitalisations: A natural experiment[J] . Anne Nolan.Social Science & Medicine . 2011 (7)
  • [6] Effectiveness of a community-based intervention to improve nutrition in young children in Senegal: a difference in difference analysis[J] . Harold Alderman,Biram Ndiaye,Sebastian Linnemayr,Abdoulaye Ka,Claudia Rokx,Khadidiatou Dieng,Menno Mulder-Sibanda.Public Health Nutrition . 2009 (5)
  • [7] Schizophrenia, Co-occurring Substance use Disorders and Quality of Care: The Differential Effect of a Managed Behavioral Health Care Carve-out[J] . Alisa B. Busch,Richard G. Frank,Anthony F. Lehman,Shelly F. Greenfield.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research . 2006 (3)
  • [8] Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models
    Drukker, David M.
    [J]. STATA JOURNAL, 2003, 3 (02) : 168 - 177
  • [9] Interaction terms in logit and probit models
    Ai, CR
    Norton, EC
    [J]. ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2003, 80 (01) : 123 - 129
  • [10] Effects of Tennessee medicaid managed care on obstetrical care and birth outcomes
    Conover, CJ
    Rankin, PJ
    Sloan, FA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLITICS POLICY AND LAW, 2001, 26 (06) : 1291 - 1324