Spatial Difference-in-Differences with Bayesian Disease Mapping Models

Bayesian disease-mapping models are widely used in small-area epidemiology to account for spatial correlation and stabilize estimates through spatial smoothing. In contrast, difference-in-differences (DID) methods-commonly used to estimate treatment effects from observational panel data-typically ignore spatial dependence. This paper integrates disease-mapping models into an imputation-based DID framework to address spatially structured residual variation and improve precision in small-area evaluations. The approach builds on recent advances in causal panel data methods, including two-way Mundlak estimation, to enable causal identification equivalent to fixed effects DID while incorporating spatiotemporal random effects. We implement the method using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation, which supports flexible spatial and temporal structures and efficient Bayesian computation. Simulations show that, when the spatiotemporal structure is correctly specified, the approach improves precision and interval coverage compared with standard DID methods. We illustrate the method by evaluating local ice cleat distribution programs in Swedish municipalities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Epidemiology
Published
2025-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0000000000001912
Primary Topic
Health disparities and outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spatial Difference-in-Differences with Bayesian Disease Mapping Models

Ulf Strömberg, Carl Bonander, Marta Blangiardo
1 links
Epidemiology
Health disparities and outcomes
article

Spatial Difference-in-Differences with Bayesian Disease Mapping Models

Ulf Strömberg, Carl Bonander, Marta Blangiardo
article en

Abstract

Bayesian disease-mapping models are widely used in small-area epidemiology to account for spatial correlation and stabilize estimates through spatial smoothing. In contrast, difference-in-differences (DID) methods-commonly used to estimate treatment effects from observational panel data-typically ignore spatial dependence. This paper integrates disease-mapping models into an imputation-based DID framework to address spatially structured residual variation and improve precision in small-area evaluations. The approach builds on recent advances in causal panel data methods, including two-way Mundlak estimation, to enable causal identification equivalent to fixed effects DID while incorporating spatiotemporal random effects. We implement the method using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation, which supports flexible spatial and temporal structures and efficient Bayesian computation. Simulations show that, when the spatiotemporal structure is correctly specified, the approach improves precision and interval coverage compared with standard DID methods. We illustrate the method by evaluating local ice cleat distribution programs in Swedish municipalities.

EpidemiologyVol. 37(1)
Karlstad University (SE), Imperial College London (GB), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Wellcome Trust, Karlstads universitet, Vetenskapsrådet, Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, Medical Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Health disparities and outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Spatial Difference-in-Differences with Bayesian Disease Mapping Models — Ulf Strömberg, Carl Bonander, et al. · Epidemiology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS