Propensity Score Methods and Unobserved Covariate Imbalance: Comments on "Squeezing the Balloon"

被引:18
作者
Ali, M. Sanni [1 ]
Groenwold, Rolf H. H. [1 ,2 ]
Klungel, Olaf H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Div Pharmacoepidemiol & Clin Pharmacol, Utrecht Inst Pharmaceut Sci, NL-3508 TB Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
MARGINAL STRUCTURAL MODELS; REGRESSION; INFERENCE;
D O I
10.1111/1475-6773.12152
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
In their recent Health Services Research article titled Squeezing the Balloon: Propensity Scores and Unmeasured Covariate Balance, Brooks and Ohsfeldt (2013) addressed an important topic on the balancing property of the propensity score (PS) with respect to unmeasured covariates. They concluded that PS methods that balance measured covariates between treated and untreated subjects exacerbate imbalance in unmeasured covariates that are unrelated to measured covariates. Furthermore, they emphasized that for PS algorithms, an imbalance on unmeasured covariates between treatment and untreated subjects is a necessary condition to achieve balance on measured covariates between the groups. We argue that these conclusions are the results of their assumptions on the mechanism of treatment allocation. In addition, we discuss the underlying assumptions of PS methods, their advantages compared with multivariate regression methods, as well as the interpretation of the effect estimates from PS methods.
引用
收藏
页码:1074 / 1082
页数:9
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (16) :3078-3094
[2]   A Tutorial and Case Study in Propensity Score Analysis: An Application to Estimating the Effect of In-Hospital Smoking Cessation Counseling on Mortality [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2011, 46 (01) :119-151
[3]   Squeezing the Balloon: Propensity Scores and Unmeasured Covariate Balance [J].
Brooks, John M. ;
Ohsfeldt, Robert L. .
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2013, 48 (04) :1487-1507
[4]   Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders [J].
Cepeda, MS ;
Boston, R ;
Farrar, JT ;
Strom, BL .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 158 (03) :280-287
[5]   Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models [J].
Cole, Stephen R. ;
Hernan, Miguel A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 168 (06) :656-664
[6]   Apples and Oranges? Interpretations of Risk Adjustment and Instrumental Variable Estimates of Intended Treatment Effects Using Observational Data [J].
Fang, Gang ;
Brooks, John M. ;
Chrischilles, Elizabeth A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 175 (01) :60-65
[7]   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
[8]  
Greenland S, 1999, STAT SCI, V14, P29
[9]   Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men [J].
Hernán, MA ;
Brumback, B ;
Robins, JM .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 11 (05) :561-570
[10]   Discussion of research using propensity-score matching:: Comments on 'A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003' by Peter!Austin, Statistics in Medicine [J].
Hill, Jennifer .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2008, 27 (12) :2055-2061