An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses

被引:339
作者
Heinze, Georg [1 ]
Jueni, Peter [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Vienna, Ctr Med Stat Informat & Intelligent Syst, Sect Clin Biometr, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
[2] Univ Hosp Bern, CTU Bern, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
[3] Univ Bern, Inst Social & Prevent Med, Div Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
关键词
Bias; Causality; Confounding by indication; Non-randomized studies; Observational studies; UNTREATED SUBJECTS; MODELS; REGRESSION; MORTALITY; ABILITY; BIAS;
D O I
10.1093/eurheartj/ehr031
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
100201 [内科学];
摘要
The assessment of treatment effects from observational studies may be biased with patients not randomly allocated to the experimental or control group. One way to overcome this conceptual shortcoming in the design of such studies is the use of propensity scores to adjust for differences of the characteristics between patients treated with experimental and control interventions. The propensity score is defined as the probability that a patient received the experimental intervention conditional on pre-treatment characteristics at baseline. Here, we review how propensity scores are estimated and how they can help in adjusting the treatment effect for baseline imbalances. We further discuss how to evaluate adequate overlap of baseline characteristics between patient groups, provide guidelines for variable selection and model building in modelling the propensity score, and review different methods of propensity score adjustments. We conclude that propensity analyses may help in evaluating the comparability of patients in observational studies, and may account for more potential confounding factors than conventional covariate adjustment approaches. However, bias due to unmeasured confounding cannot be corrected for.
引用
收藏
页码:1704 / 1708
页数:5
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]
Heart failure, chronic diuretic use, and increase in mortality and hospitalization: an observational study using propensity score methods [J].
Ahmed, Ali ;
Husain, Ahsan ;
Love, Thomas E. ;
Gambassi, Giovanni ;
Dell'Italia, Louis J. ;
Francis, Gary S. ;
Gheorghiade, Mihai ;
Allman, Richard M. ;
Meleth, Sreelatha ;
Bourge, Robert C. .
EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2006, 27 (12) :1431-1439
[2]
A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study [J].
Austin, Peter C. ;
Grootendorst, Paul ;
Anderson, Geoffrey M. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (04) :734-753
[3]
The Relative Ability of Different Propensity Score Methods to Balance Measured Covariates Between Treated and Untreated Subjects in Observational Studies [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2009, 29 (06) :661-677
[4]
Report Card on Propensity-Score Matching in the Cardiology Literature From 2004 to 2006 A Systematic Review [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2008, 1 (01) :62-67
[5]
Variable selection for propensity score models [J].
Brookhart, M. Alan ;
Schneeweiss, Sebastian ;
Rothman, Kenneth J. ;
Glynn, Robert J. ;
Avorn, Jerry ;
Sturmer, Til .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 163 (12) :1149-1156
[7]
COX DR, 1972, J R STAT SOC B, V34, P187
[8]
D'Agostino RB, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P2265, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::AID-SIM918>3.0.CO
[9]
2-B
[10]
Indications for propensity scores and review of their use in pharmacoepidemiology [J].
Glynn, RJ ;
Schneeweiss, S ;
Stürmer, T .
BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, 2006, 98 (03) :253-259