2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.01.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prognostic score–based balance measures can be a useful diagnostic for propensity score methods in comparative effectiveness research

Abstract: Objective Examining covariate balance is the prescribed method for determining when propensity score methods are successful at reducing bias. This study assessed the performance of various balance measures, including a proposed balance measure based on the prognostic score (also known as the disease-risk score), to determine which balance measures best correlate with bias in the treatment effect estimate. Study Design and Setting The correlations of multiple common balance measures with bias in the treatment… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
378
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 509 publications
(401 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
378
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Errors or missing data are inevitable; however, they would tend to bias toward the null hypothesis. Despite the use of a rigorous statistical approach, 25 there are no ways to adjust for unmeasured variables. Also, individuals receiving immunosuppression are followed closely, whereas those doing well may have been excluded from the study or prematurely lost to follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Errors or missing data are inevitable; however, they would tend to bias toward the null hypothesis. Despite the use of a rigorous statistical approach, 25 there are no ways to adjust for unmeasured variables. Also, individuals receiving immunosuppression are followed closely, whereas those doing well may have been excluded from the study or prematurely lost to follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although there is no gold standard for measuring balance, simulation and theoretical work has suggested that the SMD is a better measure of balance than others measures (e.g., t test statistic and Kolmogorov-Smirnov [KS]; Ho, Imai, King, & Stuart, 2007; Stuart et al, 2013). As such, we used the SMD's to assess balance.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, the use of outcome information in one of the proposed MSE-based approaches should be carefully considered. Some recent research has strongly cautioned against the use of outcome information in the estimation of propensity score weights (Stuart et al, 2013; Rubin, 2004; Rosenbaum, 2010; Hansen, 2008). As described by Stuart et al (2013), propensity score methods tend to be conducted without use of the outcome variable in an effort to separate the design and analysis stages of a study and allow for use of a single set of propensity scores for multiple outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some recent research has strongly cautioned against the use of outcome information in the estimation of propensity score weights (Stuart et al, 2013; Rubin, 2004; Rosenbaum, 2010; Hansen, 2008). As described by Stuart et al (2013), propensity score methods tend to be conducted without use of the outcome variable in an effort to separate the design and analysis stages of a study and allow for use of a single set of propensity scores for multiple outcomes. However, others have argued that without the use of outcome information, instrumental variables which are related to the treatment but not related to the outcome may be included in the propensity score model and result in decreased precision (Brookhart et al, 2006; Westreich et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%