2022
DOI: 10.1002/jac5.1591
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Research and scholarly methods: Propensity scores

Abstract: Propensity score methods are increasingly used as a tool to control for confounding bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. The propensity score is a dimension reducing balancing score, creating treatment, and reference groups that have comparable distributions of measured covariates. The purpose of this methods review is to provide an overview of the use of propensity score methods, including a summary of important data assumptions, various applications of the propensity score, and how to evaluate covariate ba… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the threshold for imbalance ought to become less stringent as sample size falls. On the second, we agree that a threshold is arbitrary at first, but the observational research field including most of these authors have come to relative agreement on a 0.1 constant threshold [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] despite the fact that no threshold can guarantee immunity from important bias. The appropriateness of a threshold is decided slowly over time as real study results are compared to baseline knowledge and validated in later randomized experiments.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Therefore, the threshold for imbalance ought to become less stringent as sample size falls. On the second, we agree that a threshold is arbitrary at first, but the observational research field including most of these authors have come to relative agreement on a 0.1 constant threshold [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] despite the fact that no threshold can guarantee immunity from important bias. The appropriateness of a threshold is decided slowly over time as real study results are compared to baseline knowledge and validated in later randomized experiments.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Notably, the studies by Pereira et al [36 ▪ ] and McGrattan et al [37] were cross-sectional, making them vulnerable to reverse causality. Applying statistical techniques such as propensity scores may increase confidence in conclusions drawn about effects from future observational studies in this field [41]. In addition, as nitrate intake was only measured at a single instance (via self-report/urine samples), it is unclear whether values are a true representation of habitual consumption.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a tool to control for confounding bias in health research studies by creating dimension, reducing balancing score, creating treatment and reference groups that have comparable distributions of measured covariates and calculate the impact of treatment, holding all other external effects and noise constant. Also, it summarises confounding variables into a single metric that is used for confounding control in consequent analyses 24…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study uses a propensity score matching (PSM) modelling that produces estimates with less biased, more robust and more precise than running the traditional regression analysis 22 23. In addition, it helps to measure the impact of treatment (effect of continuum of care for maternal health service utilisation on intention to use FP), holding all other external effects and noise constant 24…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%