2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.02.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impact of employment transitions on health in Germany. A difference-in-differences propensity score matching approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

8
82
1
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 119 publications
(93 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
8
82
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The DID analysis includes the weights derived from the kernel-based propensity score matching [3740]. We performed a balancing test of the difference in the means of the covariates between the control and treated groups in the baseline period to test whether the parallel trends in the baseline period was satisfied, as this is one of the key assumptions of a DID methodology.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The DID analysis includes the weights derived from the kernel-based propensity score matching [3740]. We performed a balancing test of the difference in the means of the covariates between the control and treated groups in the baseline period to test whether the parallel trends in the baseline period was satisfied, as this is one of the key assumptions of a DID methodology.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This strategy allowed the treatment and control groups to be balanced with respect to the observed characteristics. This improved the plausibility of the common trend assumption (Gebel and Voßemer 2014). Covariate balance between the treatment and control groups was observed using both standardized differences and percentage bias reduction (Austin 2011a; Gebel and Voßemer 2014).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…The question about activity limitations owing to health problems was therefore introduced. It should be inferred that, following the reasoning of Lechner (2010) and further applied by Gebel and Voßemer (2014), conditioning was not on the pre-treatment outcome itself, as this could introduce a correlation with the treatment and, thus, violate the common trend assumption.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the large domain of causality analysis, further advancements have to be developed to robustly examine macrolevel causation (Babones, 2008), whereas the panel-based difference-indifferences propensity score matching approach offers a relevant tool to detect microlevel causation (Gebel and Voßemer, 2014). In the large domain of causality analysis, further advancements have to be developed to robustly examine macrolevel causation (Babones, 2008), whereas the panel-based difference-indifferences propensity score matching approach offers a relevant tool to detect microlevel causation (Gebel and Voßemer, 2014).…”
Section: Perspectives On Methodology Social Policy and Translation mentioning
confidence: 99%