EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ 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

Propensity Score Methods for Bias Reduction in Observational Studies of Treatment Effect



Propensity Score Methods for Bias Reduction in Observational Studies of Treatment Effect



Rheumatic Diseases Clinics of North America 44(2): 203-213



A challenge to the use of observational data to study treatment effects is the issue of confounding. Noncomparability of exposed and nonexposed subjects can lead to biased estimation of the treatment effect. The propensity score is a balancing score that can be used to form matched groups, or pairs, that are not systematically different and enable nonbiased comparisons between groups. This article reviews propensity score methods with an illustrative example of the application of propensity score matching in an observational study of an uncommon disease (systemic sclerosis).

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

Accession: 065441291

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 29622292

DOI: 10.1016/j.rdc.2018.01.002



Related references

Propensity Score Methods for Bias Reduction in Observational Studies of Treatment Effect. Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America 44(2): 203-213, 2018

Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods. JAMA 297(3): 278-285, 2007

Bias reduction in repeated-measures observational studies by the use of propensity score: the case of enteral sedation for critically ill patients. Journal of Critical Care 27(6): 662-672, 2013

Propensity score modelling in observational studies using dimension reduction methods. Statistics & Probability Letters 81(7): 813-820, 2011

Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine 17(19): 2265-2281, Oct 15, 1998

Comparison of treatment effect estimates of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin between observational studies using propensity score methods and randomized controlled trials. European Journal of Epidemiology 31(6): 541-561, 2016

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

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

An Introduction to Propensity Score Methods for Reducing the Effects of Confounding in Observational Studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research 46(3): 399-424, 2011

Do observational studies using propensity score methods agree with randomized trials? A systematic comparison of studies on acute coronary syndromes. European Heart Journal 33(15): 1893-1901, 2012

An Evaluation of Weighting Methods Based on Propensity Scores to Reduce Selection Bias in Multilevel Observational Studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research 50(3): 265-284, 2016

The relative ability of different propensity score methods to balance measured covariates between treated and untreated subjects in observational studies. Medical Decision Making 29(6): 661-677, 2010

Propensity score methods gave similar results to traditional regression modeling in observational studies: a systematic review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 58(6): 550-559, 2005

Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Statistics in Medicine 34(28): 3661-3679, 2016

Survivor treatment bias, treatment selection bias, and propensity scores in observational research. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 63(2): 136-138, 2010