摘要翻译：
超额订阅的治疗通常使用随机等候名单分配。申请人随机排名，待遇待遇根据排名进行，直到所有座位都填满。为了估计因果关系，研究人员经常比较得到和没有得到offer的申请人。我们发现这两组在统计上没有可比性。因此，该比较所产生的估计量是不一致的。我们提出了一个新的估计量，并证明了它是一致的。最后，我们回顾了一个应用，我们证明了使用我们的估计量可以导致与使用常用估计量的结果有很大不同的结果。
---
英文标题：
《Estimating the effect of treatments allocated by randomized waiting
  lists》
---
作者：
Clement de Chaisemartin, Luc Behaghel
---
最新提交年份：
2018
---
分类信息：

一级分类：Statistics        统计学
二级分类：Methodology        方法论
分类描述：Design, Surveys, Model Selection, Multiple Testing, Multivariate Methods, Signal and Image Processing, Time Series, Smoothing, Spatial Statistics, Survival Analysis, Nonparametric and Semiparametric Methods
设计，调查，模型选择，多重检验，多元方法，信号和图像处理，时间序列，平滑，空间统计，生存分析，非参数和半参数方法
--
一级分类：Economics        经济学
二级分类：Econometrics        计量经济学
分类描述：Econometric Theory, Micro-Econometrics, Macro-Econometrics, Empirical Content of Economic Relations discovered via New Methods, Methodological Aspects of the Application of Statistical Inference to Economic Data.
计量经济学理论，微观计量经济学，宏观计量经济学，通过新方法发现的经济关系的实证内容，统计推论应用于经济数据的方法论方面。
--

---
英文摘要：
  Oversubscribed treatments are often allocated using randomized waiting lists. Applicants are ranked randomly, and treatment offers are made following that ranking until all seats are filled. To estimate causal effects, researchers often compare applicants getting and not getting an offer. We show that those two groups are not statistically comparable. Therefore, the estimator arising from that comparison is inconsistent. We propose a new estimator, and show that it is consistent. Finally, we revisit an application, and we show that using our estimator can lead to sizably different results from those obtained using the commonly used estimator.
---
PDF链接：
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.01453