The use of bootstrapping when using propensity-score matching without replacement: a simulation study

被引:186
作者
Austin, Peter C. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Small, Dylan S. [4 ]
机构
[1] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Management Policy & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Sunnybrook Res Inst, Schulich Heart Res Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Dept Stat, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
propensity score; propensity-score matching; bootstrap; variance estimation; Monte Carlo simulations; matching; RISK DIFFERENCES; PERFORMANCE; PROPORTIONS; MODELS;
D O I
10.1002/sim.6276
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Propensity-score matching is frequently used to estimate the effect of treatments, exposures, and interventions when using observational data. An important issue when using propensity-score matching is how to estimate the standard error of the estimated treatment effect. Accurate variance estimation permits construction of confidence intervals that have the advertised coverage rates and tests of statistical significance that have the correct type I error rates. There is disagreement in the literature as to how standard errors should be estimated. The bootstrap is a commonly used resampling method that permits estimation of the sampling variability of estimated parameters. Bootstrap methods are rarely used in conjunction with propensity-score matching. We propose two different bootstrap methods for use when using propensity-score matching without replacement and examined their performance with a series of Monte Carlo simulations. The first method involved drawing bootstrap samples from the matched pairs in the propensity-score-matched sample. The second method involved drawing bootstrap samples from the original sample and estimating the propensity score separately in each bootstrap sample and creating a matched sample within each of these bootstrap samples. The former approach was found to result in estimates of the standard error that were closer to the empirical standard deviation of the sampling distribution of estimated effects. (c) 2014 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:4306 / 4319
页数:14
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators [J].
Abadie, Alberto ;
Imbens, Guido W. .
ECONOMETRICA, 2008, 76 (06) :1537-1557
[2]  
Abadie Alberto., 2009, NBER WORKING PAPER S
[3]   Effects and non-effects of paired identical observations in comparing proportions with binary matched-pairs data [J].
Agresti, A ;
Min, YY .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2004, 23 (01) :65-75
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1993, An introduction to the bootstrap
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Springer Series in Statistics
[6]   The performance of two data-generation processes for data with specified marginal treatment odds ratios [J].
Austin, Peter C. ;
Stafford, James .
COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 2008, 37 (06) :1039-1051
[7]  
Austin PC, 2008, STAT MED, V27, P2037, DOI 10.1002/sim.3150
[8]   The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 61 (06) :537-545
[9]   Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: A systematic review and suggestions for improvement [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2007, 134 (05) :1128-U7
[10]   The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2007, 26 (16) :3078-3094