A review of covariate selection for non-experimental comparative effectiveness research

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Volumn 22, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 1139-1145

  Sauer, Brian C ^a   Brookhart, M Alan ^b   Roy, Jason ^c   Vanderweele, Tyler ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b IL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparative effectiveness research; Covariate selection; Pharmacoepidemiology; Propensity scores

Indexed keywords

CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG RESEARCH; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; COVARIATE SELECTION; PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY; PROPENSITY SCORES;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84886285592     PISSN: 10538569     EISSN: 10991557     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pds.3506     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Huse DM, Roht LH, Hartz SC. Selective use of calcium channel blockers to treat high-risk hypertensive patients. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2000; 9(1): 1-9.
2. Johnson ES, Bartman BA, Briesacher BA, et al. The incident user design in comparative effectiveness research. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2013; 22(1): 1-6.
3. Schisterman EF, Cole SR, Platt RW. Overadjustment bias and unnecessary adjustment in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiology 2009; 20(4): 488-495.
4. Robins JM, Greenland S. The role of model selection in causal inference from nonexperimental data. Am J Epidemiol 1986; 123(3): 392-402.
5. Brookhart MA, Schneeweiss S, Rothman KJ, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Sturmer T. Variable selection for propensity score models. Am J Epidemiol 2006; 163(12): 1149-1156.
6. Cain LE, Cole SR. Inverse probability-of-censoring weights for the correction of time-varying noncompliance in the effect of randomized highly active antiretroviral therapy on incident AIDS or death. Stat Med 2009; 28(12): 1725-1738.
7. Robins JM. Data, design, and background knowledge in etiologic inference. Epidemiology 2001; 12(3): 313-320.
8. Greenland S. Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias. Epidemiology 2003; 14(3): 300-306.
9. Pearl J. Myth, confusion, and science of causal analysis 2000.
10. Robinson LD, Jewell NP. Covariate adjustment. Biometrics 1991; 47(1): 342-343.
11. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios. Stat Med 2007; 26(16): 3078-3094.
12. Pearl J. Invited commentary: understanding bias amplification. Am J Epidemiol 2011; 174(11): 1223-1227; discussion pg 8-9.
13. Wooldridge J. Should instrumental variables be used as matching variables? 2009.
14. Myers JA, Rassen JA, Gagne JJ, et al. Effects of adjusting for instrumental variables on bias and precision of effect estimates. Am J Epidemiol 2011; 174(11): 1213-1222.
15. Angrist J, Imbens G, Rubin D. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc 1996; 91(28): 444-445.
16. Rubin DB. Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions. J Am Stat Assoc 2005; 100(469): 10.
17. Hernan MA, Alonso A, Logan R, et al. Observational studies analyzed like randomized experiments: an application to postmenopausal hormone therapy and coronary heart disease. Epidemiology 2008; 19(6): 766-779.
18. Greenland S, Pearl J, Robins JM. Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 1999; 10(1): 37-48.
19. Hernan MA, Hernandez-Diaz S, Werler MM, Mitchell AA. Causal knowledge as a prerequisite for confounding evaluation: an application to birth defects epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155(2):176-184.
20. Hernan MA. [Expert knowledge, confounding and causal methods]. Gac Sanit 2001; 15(Suppl 4): 44-8. Conocimiento experto, confusion y metodos causales.
21. Glymour MM, Weuve J, Berkman LF, Kawachi I, Robins JM. When is baseline adjustment useful in analyses of change? An example with education and cognitive change. Am J Epidemiol 2005; 162(3): 267-278.
22. Rubin DB. The design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: parallels with the design of randomized trials. Stat Med 2007; 26(1): 20-36.
23. Shrier I, Platt RW. Reducing bias through directed acyclic graphs. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 70.
24. Schneeweiss S, Rassen JA, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Mogun H, Brookhart MA. High-dimensional propensity score adjustment in studies of treatment effects using health care claims data. Epidemiology 2009; 20(4): 512-522.
25. VanderWeele TJ, Shpitser I. A new criterion for confounder selection. Biometrics 2011; 67(4): 1406-1413.
26. Patrick AR, Schneeweiss S, Brookhart MA, et al. The implications of propensity score variable selection strategies in pharmacoepidemiology: an empirical illustration. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2011; 20(6): 551-559.
27. Hill J. Discussion of research using propensity-score matching: comments on 'a critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003' by Peter Austin. Statistics in Medicine Stat Med 2008; 27(12): 2055-2061; discussion 66-9.
28. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127(8 Pt 2): 757-763.
29. Cepeda M, Boston R, Farrar J, Strom B. Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders. American Journal Epidemiology 2003; 158(3): 280-287.
30. Greenland S. Useful methods for sensitivity analysis of observational studies. Biometrics 1999; 55(3): 990-991.
31. Pearl J. Remarks on the method of propensity score. Stat Med 2009; 28(9): 1415-1416; author reply 20-3.
32. D'Avolio LW, Farwell WR, Fiore LD. Comparative effectiveness research and medical informatics. Am J Med 2010; 123(12 Suppl 1): e32-e37.
33. Tibshirani R. The LASSO method for variable selection in the Cox model. Stat Med 1997; 16(4): 385-395.
34. Maclure M, Schneeweiss S. Causation of bias: the episcope. Epidemiology 2001; 12(1): 114-122.
35. Rassen JA, Glynn RJ, Brookhart MA, Schneeweiss S. Covariate selection in high-dimensional propensity score analyses of treatment effects in small samples. Am J Epidemiol 2011; 173(12): 1404-1413.
36. Toh S, Garcia Rodriguez LA, Hernan MA. Confounding adjustment via a semi-automated high-dimensional propensity score algorithm: an application to electronic medical records. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2011; 20(8): 849-857.
37. Brumback BA, Hernan MA, Haneuse SJ, Robins JM. Sensitivity analyses for unmeasured confounding assuming a marginal structural model for repeated measures. Stat Med 2004; 23(5): 749-767.
38. Greenland S Basic methods for sensitivity analysis of biases. Int J Epidemiol 1996; 25(6): 1107-1116.
39. Schneeweiss S. Sensitivity analysis and external adjustment for unmeasured confounders in epidemiologic database studies of therapeutics. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2006; 15(5): 291-303.
40. Vanderweele TJ, Arah OA. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders. Epidemiology 2011; 22(1): 42-52.
41. Arah OA, Chiba Y, Greenland S. Bias formulas for external adjustment and sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounders. Ann Epidemiol 2008; 18(8): 637-646.
42. Sturmer T, Glynn RJ, Rothman KJ, Avorn J, Schneeweiss S. Adjustments for unmeasured confounders in pharmacoepidemiologic database studies using external information. Med Care 2007; 45(10 Supl 2): S158-S165.
43. Sturmer T, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, Glynn RJ. Adjusting effect estimates for unmeasured confounding with validation data using propensity score calibration. Am J Epidemiol 2005; 162(3): 279-289.
44. Vanderweele TJ, Mukherjee B, Chen J. Sensitivity analysis for interactions under unmeasured confounding. Stat Med 2012; 31: 2552-2564.