+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Reporting of covariate selection and balance assessment in propensity score analysis is suboptimal: a systematic review

Reporting of covariate selection and balance assessment in propensity score analysis is suboptimal: a systematic review

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 68(2): 112-121

To assess the current practice of propensity score (PS) analysis in the medical literature, particularly the assessment and reporting of balance on confounders. A PubMed search identified studies using PS methods from December 2011 through May 2012. For each article included in the review, information was extracted on important aspects of the PS such as the type of PS method used, variable selection for PS model, and assessment of balance. Among 296 articles that were included in the review, variable selection for PS model was explicitly reported in 102 studies (34.4%). Covariate balance was checked and reported in 177 studies (59.8%). P-values were the most commonly used statistical tools to report balance (125 of 177, 70.6%). The standardized difference and graphical displays were reported in 45 (25.4%) and 11 (6.2%) articles, respectively. Matching on the PS was the most commonly used approach to control for confounding (68.9%), followed by PS adjustment (20.9%), PS stratification (13.9%), and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW, 7.1%). Balance was more often checked in articles using PS matching and IPTW, 70.6% and 71.4%, respectively. The execution and reporting of covariate selection and assessment of balance is far from optimal. Recommendations on reporting of PS analysis are provided to allow better appraisal of the validity of PS-based studies.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 058747137

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 25433444

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.08.011

Related references

Propensity score techniques and the assessment of measured covariate balance to test causal associations in psychological research. Psychological Methods 15(3): 234-249, 2011

Covariate balance in a Bayesian propensity score analysis of beta blocker therapy in heart failure patients. Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations 6: 5-5, 2009

Potential Pitfalls of Reporting and Bias in Observational Studies With Propensity Score Analysis Assessing a Surgical Procedure: A Methodological Systematic Review. Annals of Surgery (): -, 2016

Reporting and Guidelines in Propensity Score Analysis: A Systematic Review of Cancer and Cancer Surgical Studies. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 109(8), 2017

Propensity score methods for creating covariate balance in observational studies. Revista Espanola de Cardiologia 64(10): 897-903, 2013

The z-difference can be used to measure covariate balance in matched propensity score analyses. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 66(11): 1302-1307, 2014

Assessing covariate balance when using the generalized propensity score with quantitative or continuous exposures. Statistical Methods in Medical Research: 962280218756159-962280218756159, 2018

The role of prediction modeling in propensity score estimation: an evaluation of logistic regression, bCART, and the covariate-balancing propensity score. American Journal of Epidemiology 180(6): 645-655, 2014

Goodness-of-fit diagnostics for the propensity score model when estimating treatment effects using covariate adjustment with the propensity score. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 17(12): 1202-1217, 2008

Covariate-based linkage analysis: application of a propensity score as the single covariate consistently improves power to detect linkage. European Journal of Human Genetics 14(9): 1018-1026, 2006

A systematic review of propensity score methods in the acute care surgery literature: avoiding the pitfalls and proposing a set of reporting guidelines. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, 2017

Covariate selection in high-dimensional propensity score analyses of treatment effects in small samples. American Journal of Epidemiology 173(12): 1404-1413, 2011

Assessing the impact of propensity score estimation and implementation on covariate balance and confounding control within and across important subgroups in comparative effectiveness research. Medical Care 52(3): 280-287, 2014

On variance estimate for covariate adjustment by propensity score analysis. Statistics in Medicine 35(20): 3537-3548, 2016

Reporting quality of trial abstracts-improved yet suboptimal: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2018