Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 共同教育中心
  3. 統計碩士學位學程
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/103419
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor蔡政安zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorChen-An Tsaien
dc.contributor.author賴誌凱zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorChih-Kai Laien
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-11T16:33:07Z-
dc.date.available2026-08-12-
dc.date.copyright2026-08-11-
dc.date.issued2026-
dc.date.submitted2026-07-09 00:00:00-
dc.identifier.citationAbadie, Alberto (2005). “Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators”. In: The Review of Economic Studies 72.1, pp. 1–19. DOI: 10.1111/0034-6527.00321.
Albright, Benjamin B., Dimitrios Nasioudis, Stuart Craig, et al. (2021). “Impact of Medicaid expansion on women with gynecologic cancer: a difference-in-difference analysis”. In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 224.2, 195.e1–195.e17. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.007.
Athey, Susan and Guido W. Imbens (2006). “Identification and Inference in Nonlinear Difference-in-Differences Models”. In: Econometrica 74.2, pp. 431–497. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00668.x.
Austin, Peter C. (2012). “Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying covariates”. In: Statistics in Medicine 31.29, pp. 3946–3958. DOI: 10.1002/sim.5452.
Berg, Gerard J. van den, Antoine Bozio, and Mónica Costa Dias (2020). “Policy discontinuity and duration outcomes”. In: Quantitative Economics 11.3, pp. 871–916. DOI:10.3982/QE639.
Callaway, Brantly and Pedro H. C. Sant’Anna (2021). “Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods”. In: Journal of Econometrics 225.2, pp. 200–230. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.12.001.
Cox, D. R. (1972). “Regression Models and Life-Tables”. In: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 34.2. DOI: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.
tb00899.x. Deaner, Ben and Hyejin Ku (2024). Causal Duration Analysis with Diff-in-Diff . arXiv preprint. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.05220.
Fortin, Bernard and Guy Lacroix (1997). Welfare Benefits, Minimum Wage Rate and the Duration of Welfare Spells: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Canada. Tech. rep. 97s-25. CIRANO Working Papers. URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/97s-25.pdf.
Fortin, Bernard, Guy Lacroix, and Simon Drolet (2004). “Welfare benefits and the duration of welfare spells: evidence from a natural experiment in Canada”. In: Journal of Public Economics 88.7-8, pp. 1495–1520. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.36844.
Gawdi, Rohin, Shahriyar Islam, Chaoran Sha, et al. (2025). “Statewide Medicaid Expansion and Survival in Resectable Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer”. In: JAMA Network Open 8.12, e2545996. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.45996.
Goodman-Bacon, Andrew (2021). “Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing”. In: Journal of Econometrics 225.2, pp. 254–277. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.03.014.
Han, Xuesong et al. (2022). “Association Between Medicaid Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act and Survival Among Newly Diagnosed Cancer Patients”. In: JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute 114.8, pp. 1176–1185. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djac077.
Hunt, Jennifer (1995). “The Effect of Unemployment Compensation on Unemployment Duration in Germany”. In: Journal of Labor Economics 13.1, pp. 88–120. DOI: 10.1086/298369.
Irwin, J. O. (1949). “The standard error of an estimate of expectation of life, with special reference to expectation of tumourless life in experiments with mice”. In: Journal of Hygiene (London) 47.2, pp. 188–189. DOI: 10.1017/S0022172400014443.
Kaplan, E. L. and Paul Meier (1958). “Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations”. In: Journal of the American Statistical Association 53.282, pp. 457–481. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452.
KFF (Mar. 2026). Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions/. Published March 12, 2026; Accessed 2026-04-29.
Lalive, Rafael, Jan C. van Ours, and Josef Zweimüller (2006). “How Changes in Financial Incentives Affect the Duration of Unemployment”. In: The Review of Economic Studies 73.4, pp. 1009–1038. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-937X.2006.00406.x.
Lam, Minh B. et al. (2020). “Medicaid expansion and mortality among patients with breast, lung, and colorectal cancer”. In: JAMA Network Open 3.11, e2024366. DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.24366.
Lichter, Andreas and Amelie Schiprowski (2021). “Benefit duration, job search behavior and re-employment”. In: Journal of Public Economics 193, p. 104326. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104326.
Marinescu, Ioana (2009). “Job Security Legislation and Job Duration: Evidence from the United Kingdom”. In: Journal of Labor Economics 27.3, pp. 465–486. DOI: 10.1086/603643.
Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (2026). Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. https://www.macpac.gov/topic/aca-medicaid/. Accessed 2026-04-29.
Nogueira, Leticia et al. (2020). “Colorectal Cancer Care Among Young Adult Patients After the Dependent Coverage Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act”. In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute 112.10, pp. 1063–1066. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz235.
Pak, Kyung et al. (2017). “Interpretability of Cancer Clinical Trial Results Using Restricted Mean Survival Time as an Alternative to the Hazard Ratio”. In: JAMA Oncology 3.12, pp. 1692–1696. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.2797.
Puhani, Patrick A. (2000). “Poland on the dole: The effect of reducing the unemployment benefit entitlement period during transition”. In: Journal of Population Economics 13.1, pp. 35–44. DOI: 10.1007/s001480050121.
Puhani, Patrick A. (2012). “The treatment effect, the cross difference, and the interaction term in nonlinear “difference-in-differences” models”. In: Economics Letters 115.1, pp. 85–87. DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2011.11.025.
Qiu, Sijia et al. (2023). “Dose changes for long-term opioid patients following a state opioid prescribing policy”. In: Medical Care 61.10, pp. 657–664. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001907.
Rossi, Peter H., Richard A. Berk, and Kenneth J. Lenihan (1980). Money, Work, and Crime: Experimental Evidence. New York: Academic Press.
Royston, Patrick and Mahesh K. B. Parmar (2011). “The use of restricted mean survival time to estimate the treatment effect in randomized clinical trials when the proportional hazards assumption is in doubt”. In: Statistics in Medicine. DOI: 10.1002 /sim.4274.
Royston, Patrick and Mahesh K. B. Parmar (2013). “Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome”. In: BMC Medical Research Methodology. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-152.
Sineshaw, Helmneh M. et al. (2020). “Association of Medicaid Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act With Stage at Diagnosis and Time to Treatment Initiation for Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma”. In: JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery 146.3, pp. 247–255. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.4310.
Sun, Liyang and Sarah Abraham (2021). “Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects”. In: Journal of Econometrics 225.2, pp. 175–199. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.09.006.
Thomas, Laine and Eric M. Reyes (Oct. 2014). “Tutorial: Survival Estimation for Cox Regression Models with Time-Varying Coefficients Using SAS and R”. In: Journal of Statistical Software 61.1, pp. 1–23. DOI: 10.18637/jss.v061.c01.
Tian, Lu et al. (2020). “On the empirical choice of the time window for restricted mean survival time”. In: Biometrics 76.4, pp. 1157–1166. DOI: 10.1111/biom.13237.
Trinquart, Ludovic et al. (2016). “Comparison of Treatment Effects Measured by the Hazard Ratio and by the Ratio of Restricted Mean Survival Times in Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials”. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology 34.15, pp. 1813–1819. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2015.64.2488.
U.S. Census Bureau (2026). Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/sipp.html. Accessed 2026-04-29.
Uno, Hajime et al. (2014). “Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis”. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology 32.22, pp. 2380–2385. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.2208.
Uusitalo, Roope and Jouko Verho (2010). “The effect of unemployment benefits on reemployment rates: Evidence from the Finnish unemployment insurance reform”. In:Labour Economics 17.4, pp. 643–654. DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2010.02.002.
Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. (2023). “Simple approaches to nonlinear difference-in-differences with panel data”. In: The Econometrics Journal 26.3, pp. C31–C66. DOI: 10.1093/ectj/utad016.
Wu, Lawrence L. and Fangqi Wen (2022). “Hazard Versus Linear Probability Difference-in-Differences Estimators for Demographic Processes”. In: Demography 59.5, pp. 1911–1928. DOI: 10.1215/00703370-10207604.
Zeldow, Bret and Laura A. Hatfield (2024). Constructing counterfactual time-to-event outcomes for difference-in-differences studies. Poster presented at SCI2024. URL:https://www.postersessiononline.eu/173580348_eu/congresos/SCI2024/aula/-P_141_SCI2024.pdf.
Zhong, Yingchao and Douglas E. Schaubel (2022). “Restricted mean survival time as a function of restriction time”. In: Biometrics 78.1, pp. 192–201. DOI: 10.1111/biom.13414.
-
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/103419-
dc.description.abstract在政策評估與準實驗研究中,差異中的差異分析法常被用來比較處理組與對照組在政策前後的結果變化。然而,當研究結果為事件時間資料時,資料通常具有右設限與吸收狀態的特性,個體一旦發生事件即離開風險集合,使傳統以平均結果為基礎的差異中的差異分析法不易直接適用。本研究旨在探討事件時間資料下的政策效果估計問題,並以反事實存活曲線與限制平均存活時間作為主要分析架構。
本研究提出加權反事實累積風險建構法。此方法先以傾向分數反比加權調整處理組與對照組在共變數上的差異,再透過加權 Nelson--Aalen 估計量估計兩組的累積風險函數。接著,利用政策前期估計處理組與對照組之固定對數風險差異,建構處理組在未受政策介入情境下的反事實存活曲線。最終以處理組在事實世界與反事實世界下的限制平均存活時間差異,衡量政策使事件平均延後或提前發生的效果。
本研究透過 Weibull 與 Gompertz 基礎風險設定進行模擬分析,並與 Cox 比例風險模型下的差異中的差異分析法及存續時間差異中的差異分析法比較。結果顯示本研究方法在多數情境下具有較小的平均偏誤,並能較穩定地重建處理組的反事實存活曲線;但在樣本數較小且共變數不平衡較明顯時,仍可能因加權程序而提高估計變異。實際資料應用方面,本研究分別分析出獄者財務協助與首次再逮捕時間,以及 ACA Medicaid 擴張政策與低收入非高齡成人取得 Medicaid 等待時間之關係。結論呈現本研究方法能將事件時間政策效果轉換為平均時間差,提供較單一風險比更直觀的政策解釋。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractIn policy evaluation and quasi-experimental studies, the difference-in-differences (DiD) framework is widely used to compare outcome changes between treated and control groups before and after an intervention. However, when the outcome of interest is time-to-event, standard mean-based DiD methods cannot be directly applied due to right censoring and absorbing states, as individuals leave the risk set once an event occurs. To address this challenge, this study investigates policy effect estimation for time-to-event outcomes by developing an analytical framework based on counterfactual survival curves and restricted mean survival time (RMST).
Specifically, we propose a weighted counterfactual cumulative hazard construction approach. The method first employs inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity scores to adjust for baseline covariate imbalances between the treated and control groups. It then estimates group-specific cumulative hazard functions using a weighted Nelson–Aalen estimator. Utilizing the pre-policy period, a fixed log-hazard difference between the treated and control groups is estimated and used to construct the counterfactual survival curve for the treated group in the absence of the policy. The final policy effect is quantified by the RMST difference between the factual and counterfactual survival curves, representing the average delay or acceleration in event occurrence induced by the policy.
Simulation studies are conducted under Weibull and Gompertz baseline hazard configurations to evaluate the proposed method against two benchmarks: a Cox proportional hazards DiD model and a Duration DiD model. The results demonstrate that the proposed method yields smaller mean bias in most scenarios and more stably reconstructs the counterfactual survival curve for the treated group. However, in small sample sizes with pronounced covariate imbalances, the weighting procedure may increase estimation variability. For empirical validation, this study analyzes two applications: the relationship between financial aid for released prisoners and time to first rearrest, and the impact of the ACA Medicaid expansion on the waiting time to Medicaid acquisition among low-income, non-elderly adults. The findings indicate that the proposed method successfully expresses policy effects for time-to-event outcomes as average time differences, providing a more interpretable and policy-relevant measure than a traditional single hazard ratio.
en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2026-08-11T16:33:07Z
No. of bitstreams: 0
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2026-08-11T16:33:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.tableofcontents目次
誌謝 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目次 v
圖次 vii
表次 xi
第一章 研究動機 1
第二章 文獻回顧 6
2.1 差異中的差異分析法 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 事件時間資料 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 以持續時間框架評估政策效應 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 DiD 與存活分析的結合 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.5 研究缺口與定位 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
第三章 研究方法 11
3.1 差異中的差異架構與基本假設 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2 研究設定與符號定義 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3 核心假設 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4 主方法:加權反事實累積風險建構法 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.4.1 傾向分數加權 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.4.2 加權 Nelson–Aalen 估計量 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.4.3 政策前固定對數風險差異之估計 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.4.4 反事實存活函數與 ATT 估計 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.5 比較方法一:Cox 比例風險 DiD 分析法 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.6 比較方法二:Duration DiD 分析法 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
第四章 模擬研究設計 23
4.1 資料生成機制 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.1.1 Weibull 基礎風險下的潛在事件時間生成 . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.1.2 Gompertz 基礎風險下的潛在事件時間生成 . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.1.3 設限機制 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.2 模擬情境與參數設定 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.3 母體真實值計算與模擬流程 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.4 評估指標與結果呈現方式 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
第五章 研究結果 33
5.1 模擬結果概述 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.1.1 Weibull 基礎風險下之表現比較 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.1.2 Gompertz 基礎風險下之表現比較 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.2 實際資料應用 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.2.1 再犯資料集:財務協助與出獄後首次再逮捕時間 . . . . . . . 42
5.2.2 SIPP 資料集:ACA Medicaid 擴張政策與取得 Medicaid 等待時間 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
第六章 結論與討論 50
參考文獻 53
Appendix A ACA Medicaid 擴張政策州別分類 58
Appendix B 再犯資料集敘述統計 59
Appendix C 其他模擬情境結果 60
-
dc.language.isozh_TW-
dc.subject差異中的差異分析法-
dc.subject事件時間資料-
dc.subject存活分析-
dc.subject反事實存活曲線-
dc.subject限制平均存活時間-
dc.subject傾向分數加權-
dc.subjectdifference-in-differences-
dc.subjecttime-to-event outcomes-
dc.subjectsurvival analysis-
dc.subjectcounterfactual survival curves-
dc.subjectrestricted mean survival time-
dc.subjectpropensity score weighting-
dc.title事件時間資料之差異中的差異分析:反事實存活曲線與限制平均存活時間估計zh_TW
dc.titleDifference-in-Differences for Time-to-Event Outcomes:Counterfactual Survival Curves and Restricted Mean Survival Time Estimationen
dc.typeThesis-
dc.date.schoolyear114-2-
dc.description.degree碩士-
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee薛慧敏;陳錦華zh_TW
dc.contributor.oralexamcommitteeHuey-Miin Hsueh;Jin-Hua Chenen
dc.subject.keyword差異中的差異分析法; 事件時間資料; 存活分析; 反事實存活曲線; 限制平均存活時間; 傾向分數加權zh_TW
dc.subject.keyworddifference-in-differences; time-to-event outcomes; survival analysis; counterfactual survival curves; restricted mean survival time; propensity score weightingen
dc.relation.page77-
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202601758-
dc.rights.note未授權-
dc.date.accepted2026-07-13-
dc.contributor.author-college共同教育中心-
dc.contributor.author-dept統計碩士學位學程-
dc.date.embargo-liftN/A-
顯示於系所單位:統計碩士學位學程

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-114-2.pdf
  未授權公開取用
2.99 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved