Measuring balance and model selection in propensity score methods

被引:76
作者
Belitser, Svetlana V. [1 ]
Martens, Edwin P. [1 ,2 ]
Pestman, Wiebe R. [1 ,2 ]
Groenwold, Rolf H. H. [1 ,2 ]
de Boer, Anthonius [1 ]
Klungel, Olaf H. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Dept Pharmacoepidemiol & Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht Inst Pharmaceut Sci, NL-3584 CA Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
bias; confounding; propensity scores; REGRESSION; PERFORMANCE; ADJUSTMENT;
D O I
10.1002/pds.2188
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose Propensity score (PS) methods focus on balancing confounders between groups to estimate an unbiased treatment or exposure effect. However, there is lack of attention in actually measuring, reporting and using the information on balance, for instance for model selection. We propose to use a measure for balance in PS methods and describe several of such measures: the overlapping coefficient, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance, and the Levy distance. Methods We performed simulation studies to estimate the association between these three and several mean based measures for balance and bias (i.e., discrepancy between the true and the estimated treatment effect). Results For large sample sizes (n = 2000) the average Pearson's correlation coefficients between bias and Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance (r = 0.89), the Levy distance (r = 0.89) and the absolute standardized mean difference (r = 0.90) were similar, whereas this was lower for the overlapping coefficient (r = -0.42). When sample size decreased to 400, mean based measures of balance had stronger correlations with bias. Models including all confounding variables, their squares and interaction terms resulted in smaller bias than models that included only main terms for confounding variables. Conclusions We conclude that measures for balance are useful for reporting the amount of balance reached in propensity score analysis and can be helpful in selecting the final PS model. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1115 / 1129
页数:15
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Kernel smoothing
[2]  
Austin PC, 2008, STAT MED, V27, P2037, DOI 10.1002/sim.3150
[3]   The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 61 (06) :537-545
[4]   The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (16) :3078-3094
[5]   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
[6]   Conditioning on the propensity score can result in biased estimation of common measures of treatment effect: A Monte Carlo study (p n/a) [J].
Austin, Peter C. ;
Grootendorst, Paul ;
Normand, Sharon-Lise T. ;
Anderson, Geoffrey M. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (16) :3208-3210
[7]   Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2009, 28 (25) :3083-3107
[8]   Goodness-of-fit diagnostics for the propensity score model when estimating treatment effects using covariate adjustment with the propensity score [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2008, 17 (12) :1202-1217
[9]   Assessing balance in measured baseline covariates when using many-to-one matching on the propensity-score [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2008, 17 (12) :1218-1225
[10]  
Bradley EL, 1985, ENCY STAT SCI, V6