It is common to conduct causal inference in matched observational studies by
proceeding as though treatment assignments within matched sets are assigned
uniformly at random and using this distribution as the basis for inference.
This approach ignores observed discrepancies in matched sets that may be
consequential for the distribution of treatment, which are succinctly captured
by within-set differences in the propensity score. We address this problem via
covariate-adaptive randomization inference, which modifies the permutation
probabilities to vary with estimated propensity score discrepancies and avoids
requirements to exclude matched pairs or model an outcome variable. We show
that the test achieves type I error control arbitrarily close to the nominal
level when large samples are available for propensity score estimation. We
characterize the large-sample behavior of the new randomization test for a
difference-in-means estimator of a constant additive effect. We also show that
existing methods of sensitivity analysis generalize effectively to
covariate-adaptive randomization inference. Finally, we evaluate the empirical
value of covariate-adaptive randomization procedures via comparisons to
traditional uniform inference in matched designs with and without propensity
score calipers and regression adjustment using simulations and analyses of
genetic damage among welders and right-heart catheterization in surgical
patients.Comment: 41 pages, 8 figure