Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

30 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Generalizing observational study results: applying propensity score methods to complex surveys.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To provide a tutorial for using propensity score methods with complex survey data.

Data sources

Simulated data and the 2008 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

Study design

Using simulation, we compared the following methods for estimating the treatment effect: a naïve estimate (ignoring both survey weights and propensity scores), survey weighting, propensity score methods (nearest neighbor matching, weighting, and subclassification), and propensity score methods in combination with survey weighting. Methods are compared in terms of bias and 95 percent confidence interval coverage. In Example 2, we used these methods to estimate the effect on health care spending of having a generalist versus a specialist as a usual source of care.

Principal findings

In general, combining a propensity score method and survey weighting is necessary to achieve unbiased treatment effect estimates that are generalizable to the original survey target population.

Conclusions

Propensity score methods are an essential tool for addressing confounding in observational studies. Ignoring survey weights may lead to results that are not generalizable to the survey target population. This paper clarifies the appropriate inferences for different propensity score methods and suggests guidelines for selecting an appropriate propensity score method based on a researcher's goal.

SUBMITTER: Dugoff EH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3894255 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Propensity score modelling in observational studies using dimension reduction methods.

Project description:Conditional independence assumptions are very important in causal inference modelling as well as in dimension reduction methodologies. These are two very strikingly different statistical literatures, and we study links between the two in this article. The concept of covariate sufficiency plays an important role, and we provide theoretical justification when dimension reduction and partial least squares methods will allow for valid causal inference to be performed. The methods are illustrated with application to a medical study and to simulated data.

| S-EPMC3099445 | biostudies-literature

Heart failure, chronic diuretic use, and increase in mortality and hospitalization: an observational study using propensity score methods.

Project description:Non-potassium-sparing diuretics are commonly used in heart failure (HF). They activate the neurohormonal system, and are potentially harmful. Yet, the long-term effects of chronic diuretic use in HF are largely unknown. We retrospectively analysed the Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) data to determine the effects of diuretics on HF outcomes.Propensity scores for diuretic use were calculated for each of the 7788 DIG participants using a non-parsimonious multivariable logistic regression model, and were used to match 1391 (81%) no-diuretic patients with 1391 diuretic patients. Effects of diuretics on mortality and hospitalization at 40 months of median follow-up were assessed using matched Cox regression models. All-cause mortality was 21% for no-diuretic patients and 29% for diuretic patients [hazard ratio (HR) 1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.55; P = 0.002]. HF hospitalizations occurred in 18% of no-diuretic patients and 23% of diuretic patients (HR 1.37; 95% CI 1.13-1.65; P = 0.001).Chronic diuretic use was associated with increased long-term mortality and hospitalizations in a wide spectrum of ambulatory chronic systolic and diastolic HF patients. The findings of the current study challenge the wisdom of routine chronic use of diuretics in HF patients who are asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic without fluid retention, and are on complete neurohormonal blockade. These findings, based on a non-randomized design, need to be further studied in randomized trials.

| S-EPMC2443408 | biostudies-other

Measuring Model Misspecification: Application to Propensity Score Methods with Complex Survey Data.

Project description:Model misspecification is a potential problem for any parametric-model based analysis. However, the measurement and consequences of model misspecification have not been well formalized in the context of causal inference. A measure of model misspecification is proposed, and the consequences of model misspecification in non-experimental causal inference methods are investigated. The metric is then used to explore which estimators are more sensitive to misspecification of the outcome and/or treatment assignment model. Three frequently used estimators of the treatment effect are considered, all of which rely on the propensity score: (1) full matching, (2) 1:1 nearest neighbor matching, and (3) weighting. The performance of these estimators is evaluated under two different sampling designs: (1) simple random sampling (SRS) and (2) a two-stage stratified survey. As the degree of misspecification of either the propensity score or outcome model increases, so does the bias and the root mean square error, while the coverage decreases. Results are similar for the simple random sample and a complex survey design.

| S-EPMC6034692 | biostudies-literature

Benchmarking Observational Analyses Against Randomized Trials: a Review of Studies Assessing Propensity Score Methods.

Project description:BackgroundObservational analysis methods can be refined by benchmarking against randomized trials. We reviewed studies systematically comparing observational analyses using propensity score methods against randomized trials to explore whether intervention or outcome characteristics predict agreement between designs.MethodsWe searched PubMed (from January 1, 2000, to April 30, 2017), the AHRQ Scientific Resource Center Methods Library, reference lists, and bibliographies to identify systematic reviews that compared estimates from observational analyses using propensity scores against randomized trials across three or more clinical topics; reported extractable relative risk (RR) data; and were published in English. One reviewer extracted data from all eligible systematic reviews; a second reviewer verified the extracted data.ResultsSix systematic reviews matching published observational studies to randomized trials, published between 2012 and 2016, met our inclusion criteria. The reviews reported on 127 comparisons overall, in cardiology (29 comparisons), surgery (49), critical care medicine and sepsis (46), nephrology (2), and oncology (1). Disagreements were large (relative RR < 0.7 or > 1.43) in 68 (54%) and statistically significant in 12 (9%) of the comparisons. The degree of agreement varied among reviews but was not strongly associated with intervention or outcome characteristics.DiscussionDisagreements between observational studies using propensity score methods and randomized trials can occur for many reasons and the available data cannot be used to discern the reasons behind specific disagreements. Better benchmarking of observational analyses using propensity scores (and other causal inference methods) is possible using observational studies that explicitly attempt to emulate target trials.

| S-EPMC7210373 | biostudies-literature

Multinomial Extension of Propensity Score Trimming Methods: A Simulation Study.

Project description:Crump et al. (Biometrika. 2009;96(1):187-199), Stürmer et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(7):843-854), and Walker et al. (Comp Eff Res. 2013;2013(3):11-20) proposed propensity score (PS) trimming methods as a means to improve efficiency (Crump) or reduce confounding (Stürmer and Walker). We generalized the trimming definitions by considering multinomial PSs, one for each treatment, and proved that these proposed definitions reduce to the original binary definitions when we have only 2 treatment groups. We then examined the performance of the proposed multinomial trimming methods in the setting of 3 treatment groups, in which subjects with extreme PSs more likely had unmeasured confounders. Inverse probability of treatment weights, matching weights, and overlap weights were used to control for measured confounders. All 3 methods reduced bias regardless of the weighting methods in most scenarios. Multinomial Stürmer and Walker trimming were more successful in bias reduction when the 3 treatment groups had very different sizes (10:10:80). Variance reduction, seen in all methods with inverse probability of treatment weights but not with matching weights or overlap weights, was more successful with multinomial Crump and Stürmer trimming. In conclusion, our proposed definitions of multinomial PS trimming methods were beneficial within our simulation settings that focused on the influence of unmeasured confounders.

| S-EPMC6395163 | biostudies-literature

Propensity score analysis methods with balancing constraints: A Monte Carlo study.

Project description:The inverse probability weighting is an important propensity score weighting method to estimate the average treatment effect. Recent literature shows that it can be easily combined with covariate balancing constraints to reduce the detrimental effects of excessively large weights and improve balance. Other methods are available to derive weights that balance covariate distributions between the treatment groups without the involvement of propensity scores. We conducted comprehensive Monte Carlo experiments to study whether the use of covariate balancing constraints circumvent the need for correct propensity score model specification, and whether the use of a propensity score model further improves the estimation performance among methods that use similar covariate balancing constraints. We compared simple inverse probability weighting, two propensity score weighting methods with balancing constraints (covariate balancing propensity score, covariate balancing scoring rule), and two weighting methods with balancing constraints but without using the propensity scores (entropy balancing and kernel balancing). We observed that correct specification of the propensity score model remains important even when the constraints effectively balance the covariates. We also observed evidence suggesting that, with similar covariate balance constraints, the use of a propensity score model improves the estimation performance when the dimension of covariates is large. These findings suggest that it is important to develop flexible data-driven propensity score models that satisfy covariate balancing conditions.

| S-EPMC9161720 | biostudies-literature

Propensity score stratification methods for continuous treatments.

Project description:Continuous treatments propensity scoring remains understudied as the majority of methods are focused on the binary treatment setting. Current propensity score methods for continuous treatments typically rely on weighting in order to produce causal estimates. It has been shown that in some continuous treatment settings, weighting methods can result in worse covariate balance than had no adjustments been made to the data. Furthermore, weighting is not always stable, and resultant estimates may be unreliable due to extreme weights. These issues motivate the current development of novel propensity score stratification techniques to be used with continuous treatments. Specifically, the generalized propensity score cumulative distribution function (GPS-CDF) and the nonparametric GPS-CDF approaches are introduced. Empirical CDFs are used to stratify subjects based on pretreatment confounders in order to produce causal estimates. A detailed simulation study shows superiority of these new stratification methods based on the empirical CDF, when compared with standard weighting techniques. The proposed methods are applied to the "Mexican-American Tobacco use in Children" study to determine the causal relationship between continuous exposure to smoking imagery in movies, and smoking behavior among Mexican-American adolescents. These promising results provide investigators with new options for implementing continuous treatment propensity scoring.

| S-EPMC8629138 | biostudies-literature

Adaptive propensity score procedure improves matching in prospective observational trials.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Randomized controlled trials are the gold-standard for clinical trials. However, randomization is not always feasible. In this article we propose a prospective and adaptive matched case-control trial design assuming that a control group already exists. METHODS:We propose and discuss an interim analysis step to estimate the matching rate using a resampling step followed by a sample size recalculation. The sample size recalculation is based on the observed mean resampling matching rate. We applied our approach in a simulation study and to a real data set to evaluate the characteristics of the proposed design and to compare the results to a naive approach. RESULTS:The proposed design achieves at least 10% higher matching rate than the naive approach at final analysis, thus providing a better estimation of the true matching rate. A good choice for the interim analysis seems to be a fraction of around [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] of the control patients. CONCLUSION:The proposed resampling step in a prospective matched case-control trial design leads to an improved estimate of the final matching rate and, thus, to a gain in power of the approach due to sensible sample size recalculation.

| S-EPMC6636117 | biostudies-literature

Applying polygenic risk score methods to pharmacogenomics GWAS: challenges and opportunities.

Project description:Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have emerged as promising tools for the prediction of human diseases and complex traits in disease genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Applying PRSs to pharmacogenomics (PGx) studies has begun to show great potential for improving patient stratification and drug response prediction. However, there are unique challenges that arise when applying PRSs to PGx GWAS beyond those typically encountered in disease GWAS (e.g. Eurocentric or trans-ethnic bias). These challenges include: (i) the lack of knowledge about whether PGx or disease GWAS/variants should be used in the base cohort (BC); (ii) the small sample sizes in PGx GWAS with corresponding low power and (iii) the more complex PRS statistical modeling required for handling both prognostic and predictive effects simultaneously. To gain insights in this landscape about the general trends, challenges and possible solutions, we first conduct a systematic review of both PRS applications and PRS method development in PGx GWAS. To further address the challenges, we propose (i) a novel PRS application strategy by leveraging both PGx and disease GWAS summary statistics in the BC for PRS construction and (ii) a new Bayesian method (PRS-PGx-Bayesx) to reduce Eurocentric or cross-population PRS prediction bias. Extensive simulations are conducted to demonstrate their advantages over existing PRS methods applied in PGx GWAS. Our systematic review and methodology research work not only highlights current gaps and key considerations while applying PRS methods to PGx GWAS, but also provides possible solutions for better PGx PRS applications and future research.

| S-EPMC10782924 | biostudies-literature

An overview of propensity score matching methods for clustered data.

Project description:Propensity score matching is commonly used in observational studies to control for confounding and estimate the causal effects of a treatment or exposure. Frequently, in observational studies data are clustered, which adds to the complexity of using propensity score techniques. In this article, we give an overview of propensity score matching methods for clustered data, and highlight how propensity score matching can be used to account for not just measured confounders, but also unmeasured cluster level confounders. We also consider using machine learning methods such as generalized boosted models to estimate the propensity score and show that accounting for clustering when using these methods can greatly reduce the performance, particularly when there are a large number of clusters and a small number of subjects per cluster. In order to get around this we highlight scenarios where it may be possible to control for measured covariates using propensity score matching, while using fixed effects regression in the outcome model to control for cluster level covariates. Using simulation studies we compare the performance of different propensity score matching methods for clustered data across a number of different settings. Finally, as an illustrative example we apply propensity score matching methods for clustered data to study the causal effect of aspirin on hearing deterioration using data from the conservation of hearing study.

| S-EPMC10119899 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data