SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2205.09736

Balanced and Robust Randomized Treatment Assignments: The Finite Selection Model for the Health Insurance Experiment and Beyond

Abstract

The Finite Selection Model (FSM) was developed by Carl Morris in the 1970s for the design of the RAND Health Insurance Experiment (HIE) (Morris 1979, Newhouse et al. 1993), one of the largest and most comprehensive social science experiments conducted in the U.S. The idea behind the FSM is that each treatment group takes its turns selecting units in a fair and random order to optimize a common assignment criterion. At each of its turns, a treatment group selects the available unit that maximally improves the combined quality of its resulting group of units in terms of the criterion. In the HIE and beyond, we revisit, formalize, and extend the FSM as a general tool for experimental design. Leveraging the idea of D-optimality, we propose and analyze a new selection criterion in the FSM. The FSM using the D-optimal selection function has no tuning parameters, is affine invariant, and when appropriate, retrieves several classical designs such as randomized block and matched-pair designs. For multi-arm experiments, we propose algorithms to generate a fair and random selection order of treatments. We demonstrate FSM's performance in a case study based on the HIE and in ten randomized studies from the health and social sciences. On average, the FSM achieves 68% better covariate balance than complete randomization and 56% better covariate balance than rerandomization in a typical study. We recommend the FSM be considered in experimental design for its conceptual simplicity, efficiency, and robustness.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ambarish Chattopadhyay, Carl N. Morris, Jose R. Zubizarreta. 2022-05-19. Balanced and Robust Randomized Treatment Assignments: The Finite Selection Model for the Health Insurance Experiment and Beyond. https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.09736

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME