🤖 AI Summary
This study addresses the inconsistency in causal effect estimates between observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by proposing the first unified framework for decomposing causal effect heterogeneity. The framework systematically identifies and quantifies three sources of heterogeneity: differences in covariate distributions, variation in mediating pathways, and shifts in outcome-generating mechanisms. Methodologically, it formally defines effect decomposition across data types (observational vs. experimental), integrating causal inference, sensitivity analysis, and decomposition modeling, while enabling robust parameter estimation under multiple hypotheses. Evaluated through simulation studies and an empirical analysis of the “Moving to Opportunity” experiment, the framework demonstrates improved interpretability, robustness, and policy generalizability in synthesizing evidence from heterogeneous data sources.
📝 Abstract
This paper introduces a novel decomposition framework to explain heterogeneity in causal effects observed across different studies, considering both observational and randomized settings. We present a formal decomposition of between-study heterogeneity, identifying sources of variability in treatment effects across studies. The proposed methodology allows for robust estimation of causal parameters under various assumptions, addressing differences in pre-treatment covariate distributions, mediating variables, and the outcome mechanism. Our approach is validated through a simulation study and applied to data from the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) study, demonstrating its practical relevance. This work contributes to the broader understanding of causal inference in multi-study environments, with potential applications in evidence synthesis and policy-making.