Combining propensity score matching with additional adjustments for prognostic covariates

被引:436
作者
Rubin, DB [1 ]
Thomas, N
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Dept Stat, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[2] Bristol Myers Squibb Co, Wallingford, CT 06492 USA
关键词
bias reduction; causal inference; covariance adjustment; discriminant matching; Mahalanobis metric matching; matched sampling; nonrandomized studies; observational studies;
D O I
10.2307/2669400
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Propensity score matching refers to a class of multivariate methods used in comparative studies to construct treated and matched control samples that have similar distributions on many covariates. This matching is the observational study analog of randomization in ideal experiments, but is far less complete as it can only balance the distribution of observed covariates, whereas randomization balances the distribution of all covariates, both observed and unobserved. An important feature of propensity score matching is that it can be easily combined with model-based regression adjustments or with matching on a subset of special prognostic covariates or combinations of prognostic covariates that have been identified as being especially predictive of the outcome variables. We extend earlier results by developing approximations for the distributions of covariates in matched samples created with linear propensity score methods for the practically important situation where matching uses both the estimated linear propensity scores and a set of special prognostic covariates. Such matching;on a subset of special prognostic covariates is an observational study analog of blocking in a randomized experiment. An example combining propensity score matching with Mahalanobis metric matching and regression adjustment is presented that demonstrates the flexibility of these methods for designing an observational study that effectively reduces both bias due to many observed covariates and bias and variability due to a more limited subset of covariates. Of particular importance, the general approach, which includes propensity score matching, was distinctly superior to methods that focus only on a subset of the prognostically most important covariates, even if those covariates account for most of the variation in the outcome variables. Also of importance, analyses based on matched samples were superior to those based on the full unmatched samples, even when regression adjustment was included.
引用
收藏
页码:573 / 585
页数:13
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]   ROBUSTNESS OF FISHERS LINEAR DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION UNDER 2-COMPONENT MIXED NORMAL-MODELS [J].
ASHIKAGA, T ;
CHANG, PC .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1981, 76 (375) :676-680
[2]   MATCHING WHEN COVARIABLES ARE NORMALLY DISTRIBUTED [J].
CARPENTER, RG .
BIOMETRIKA, 1977, 64 (02) :299-307
[3]   EFFECTIVENESS OF ADJUSTMENT BY SUBCLASSIFICATION IN REMOVING BIAS IN OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES [J].
COCHRAN, WG .
BIOMETRICS, 1968, 24 (02) :295-&
[4]  
COCHRAN WG, 1973, SANKHYA SER A, V35, P417
[5]   SELECTION OF VARIABLES IN MIXED-VARIABLE DISCRIMINANT-ANALYSIS [J].
DAUDIN, JJ .
BIOMETRICS, 1986, 42 (03) :473-481
[6]   EFFECTS OF MISSPECIFICATION OF THE PROPENSITY SCORE ON ESTIMATORS OF TREATMENT EFFECT [J].
DRAKE, C .
BIOMETRICS, 1993, 49 (04) :1231-1236
[7]   EFFICIENCY OF LOGISTIC REGRESSION COMPARED TO NORMAL DISCRIMINANT-ANALYSIS [J].
EFRON, B .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1975, 70 (352) :892-898
[8]  
Gu Xing S., 1993, J. Comput. Graph. Stat, V2, P405
[9]  
HILL J, 1999, RES DESIGN D CAMPBEL
[10]   DISCRIMINATION AND CLASSIFICATION USING BOTH BINARY AND CONTINUOUS VARIABLES [J].
KRZANOWSKI, WJ .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1975, 70 (352) :782-790