The Elephant in the Corner: A Cautionary Tale about Measurement Error in Treatment Effects Models

Researchers in economics and other disciplines are often interested in the causal effect of a binary treatment on outcomes. Econometric methods used to estimate such effects are divided into one of two strands depending on whether they require the conditional independence assumption (i.e., independence of potential outcomes and treatment assignment conditional on a set of observable covariates). When this assumption holds, researchers now have a wide array of estimation techniques from which to choose. However, very little is known about their performance - both in absolute and relative terms - when measurement error is present. In this study, the performance of several estimators that require the conditional independence assumption, as well as some that do not, are evaluated in a Monte Carlo study. In all cases, the data-generating process is such that conditional independence holds with the 'real' data. However, measurement error is then introduced. Specifically, three types of measurement error are considered: (i) errors in treatment assignment, (ii) errors in the outcome, and (iii) errors in the vector of covariates. Recommendations for researchers are provided

Quantification and prevalence of Salmonella in beef cattle presenting at slaughter

Aims: A survey to determine the prevalence and numbers of Salmonella in beef cattle presented for slaughter at abattoirs across Australia was conducted between September 2002 and January 2003. Methods and Results: Automated immunomagnetic separation (AIMS) was used for detection and isolation of Salmonella enriched from cattle faeces. Salmonella were enumerated from positive samples using a combination of the Most Probable Number (MPN) technique and AIMS. A total of 310 faecal samples were tested, 155 were from lot-fed cattle and 155 from grass-fed cattle. Salmonella spp. were isolated from 21 (6.8%) of the cattle and the prevalence amongst grass-fed cattle (4.5%) was not significantly different to that found in lot-fed cattle (9%). Counts of Salmonella in positive faeces varied fro