Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Jun 19;28(6):1761–1780. doi: 10.1177/0962280218774936

Table 2.

Estimator performance in Simulation 1 under minimal covariate interference (equation (22)) and under stronger covariate interference (equation (23)).

Estimator Minimal covariate interference
Stronger covariate interference
Bias σ rMSE Power Coverage Bias σ rMSE Power Coverage
Unadj. 10.4 5.0 11.5 66 46 7.6 3.8 8.5 72 49
TMLE-Ia 0.0 1.2 1.2 28 95 0.0 1.4 1.4 34 94
TMLE-Ib 0.0 1.2 1.2 27 95 0.0 1.4 1.4 23 98
TMLE-II 0.2 1.2 1.2 34 95 1.7 1.6 2.3 65 81
Independent UY determining the outcome
Unadj. 6.3 3.2 7.1 88 48 −3.6 2.4 4.3 21 67
TMLE-Ia −0.0 1.3 1.3 86 94 0.0 1.7 1.7 96 94
TMLE-Ib −0.0 1.3 1.3 28 100 0.0 1.8 1.8 91 98
TMLE-II −4.1 2.4 4.7 5 58 −2.1 2.0 3.0 56 81
Dependent UY determining the outcome

Note: We also vary the dependence of the unmeasured factors determining the outcome Uy: independent (top) and correlated (bottom). Performance is given by bias as the average deviation between the estimate and truth; σ as the standard error; rMSE as the root-mean squared error; power as the proportion of times the false null hypothesis is rejected, and coverage as the proportion of times the 95% confidence interval contains the true value. All measures are percentages.