Partially identified treatment effects under imperfect compliance: the case of domestic violence

The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (MDVE) is a randomized social experiment with imperfect compliance which has been extremely influential in how police officers respond to misdemeanor domestic violence. This paper re-examines data from the MDVE, using recent literature on partial identification to find recidivism associated with a policy that arrests misdemeanor domestic violence suspects rather than not arresting them. Using partially identified bounds on the average treatment effect I find that arresting rather than not arresting suspects can potentially reduce recidivism by more than two-and-a-half times the corresponding intent-to-treat estimate and more than two times the corresponding local average treatment effect, even when making minimal assumptions on counterfactuals.

A score test for binary data with patient non-compliance

A score test is developed for binary clinical trial data, which incorporates patient non-compliance while respecting randomization. It is assumed in this paper that compliance is all-or-nothing, in the sense that a patient either accepts all of the treatment assigned as specified in the protocol, or none of it. Direct analytic comparisons of the adjusted test statistic for both the score test and the likelihood ratio test are made with the corresponding test statistics that adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. It is shown that no gain in power is possible over the intention-to-treat analysis, by adjusting for patient non-compliance. Sample size formulae are derived and simulation studies are used to demonstrate that the sample size approximation holds. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ensuring operational compliance and ethical responsibility in the regulation of ART: the HFEA, past, present, and future

Under the Public Bodies Bill 2010, the HFEA, cornerstone in the regulation of assisted reproduction technologies (ART) for the last twenty years, is due to be abolished. This implies that there is no longer a need for a dedicated regulator for ART and that the existing roles of the Authority as both operational compliance monitor, and instance of ethical evaluation, may be absorbed by existing healthcare regulators. This article presents a timely analysis of these disparate functions of the HFEA, charting reforms adopted in 2008 and assessing the impact of the current proposals. Taking assisted conception treatment as the focus activity, it will be shown that the last few years have seen a concentration on the HFEA as a technical regulator based upon the principles of Better Regulation, with little analysis of how the ethical responsibility of the Authority fits into this framework. The current proposal to abolish the HFEA continues to fail to address this crucial question. Notwithstanding the fact that the scope of the Authority's ethical role may be questioned, its abolition requires that the Government consider what alternatives exists - or need to be put in place - to provide both responsive operational regulation and a forum for ethical reflection and decision-making in an area which continues to pose regulatory challenges