Alternative solutions to the problem of selection bias in an analysis of federal residential drug treatment programs

Evaluation Review

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 331-369

  Rhodes, William ^a   Pelissier, Bernadette ^b   Gaes, Gerald ^b   Saylor, William ^b   Camp, Scott ^b   Wallace, Susan ^b  

^a ABT ASSOCIATES   (United States)

^b FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRIME; DRUG DEPENDENCE TREATMENT; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PRISONER; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; SURVIVAL; UNITED STATES;

CRIME; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PRISONERS; PROGRAM EVALUATION; SELECTION BIAS; SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT CENTERS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0035377214     PISSN: 0193841X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0102500303     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Burtless, G. 1995. The case for randomized field trials in econometric and policy research. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (2): 63-84.
2. Davidson, R., and J. G. MacKinnon. 1993. Estimation and inference in econometrics. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Dehejia, R., and S. Wahba. 1999. Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: Reevaluating the evaluation of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94 (48): 1053-62.
4. Greene, W. 1998. LIMDEP: Version 7 users manual. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software.
5. Heckman, J. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 12:1-145.
6. Heckman, J., H. Ichimura, J. Smith, and P. Todd. 1998. Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica 66 (5): 1017-98.
7. Heckman, J., and J. Smith. 1995. Assessing the case for social experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (2): 85-110.
8. Kalbfleisch, J., and R. Prentice. 1980. The statistical analysis of failure time data. New York: John Wiley.
9. LaLonda, R. 1986. Evaluating the econometric evaluation of training programs with experimental data. American Economic Review 76:604-20.
10. Lancaster, T. 1990. The econometric analysis of transition data. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Maddala, G. 1983. Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Manski, C., and D. Nagin. 1998. Bounding disagreements about treatment effects: A case study of sentencing and recidivism. In Sociological methodology, edited by A. Raftery, 99-138. Boston: Blackwell.
13. Pelissier, B., G. Gaes, W. Rhodes, S. Camp, J. O'Neil, S. Wallace, and W. Saylor. 1998. TRIAD drug treatment evaluation project: Six-month interim report. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Prisons.
14. Rhodes, W. 1989. The criminal career: Estimates of the duration and frequency of crime commission. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 5 (1): 3-32.
15. Schmidt, P., and A. Witte. 1988. Predicting recidivism using survival models. New York: Springer-Verlag.
16. Smith, H. 1997. Matching with multiple controls to estimate treatment effects - Observational studies. In Sociological methodology 1997, edited by A. Raftery, 325-54. Boston: Blackwell.
17. Spelman, W. 1994. Criminal incapacitation. New York: Plenum.
18. Yamaguchi, K. 1986. Alternative approaches to unobserved heterogeneity: The analysis of repeatable events. In Sociological methodology 1986, edited by N. Tuma, 213-49. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.