Optimal full matching for survival outcomes: a method that merits more widespread use

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 34, Issue 30, 2015, Pages 3949-3967

  Austin, Peter C ^a,b,c   Stuart, Elizabeth A ^d  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EVALUATIVE SCIENCES   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre   (Canada)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

bias; full matching; matching; Monte Carlo simulations; observational studies; optimal matching; propensity score

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ERROR; FEMALE; HEART INFARCTION; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MORTALITY; NEAREST NEIGHBOR CALIPER MATCHING; NEAREST NEIGHBOR MATCHING; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OPTIMAL FULL MATCHING; PROBABILITY; PROPENSITY SCORE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; BIOSTATISTICS; CASE CONTROL STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROCEDURES; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

BIOSTATISTICS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROPENSITY SCORE; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84938629257     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6602     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Imbens GW. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2004; 86: 4–29.
2. Iacus SM, King G, Porro G. Causal inference without balance checking: coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis. 2012; 20(1):1–24.
3. Gu XS, Rosenbaum PR. Comparison of multivariate matching methods: structures, distances, and algorithms. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics. 1993; 2:405–420.
4. Stuart EA. Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Statistical Science. 2010; 25(1):1–21.
5. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983; 70:41–55.
6. Austin PC. A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003. Statistics in Medicine. 2008; 27(12):2037–2049.
7. Austin PC. A report card on propensity-score matching in the cardiology literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2008; 1:62–67.
8. Austin PC. Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2007; 134(5):1128–1135.
9. Ming K, Rosenbaum PR. Substantial gains in bias reduction from matching with a variable number of controls. Biometrics. 2000; 56(1):118–124.
10. Austin PC. Statistical criteria for selecting the optimal number of untreated subjects matched to each treated subject when using many-to-one matching on the propensity score. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2010; 172(9):1092–1097.
11. Rosenbaum PR. Observational Studies. Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, 2002.
12. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician. 1985; 39:33–38.
13. Austin PC. A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score. Statisics in Medicine. 2014; 33(6):1057–1069.
14. Sturmer T, Joshi M, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Rothman KJ, Schneeweiss S. A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2006; 59(5):437–447.
15. Hansen BB. Full matching in an observational study of coaching for the SAT. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 2004; 99(467):609–618.
16. Rosenbaum PR. A characterization of optimal designs for observational studies. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society - Series B. 1991; 53:597–610.
17. Austin PC, Manca A, Zwarenstein M, Juurlink DN, Stanbrook MB. A substantial and confusing variation exists in handling of baseline covariates in randomized controlled trials: a review of trials published in leading medical journals. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2010; 63(2):142–153.
18. Szafara KL, Kruse RL, Mehr DR, Ribbe MW, van der Steen JT. Mortality following nursing home-acquired lower respiratory infection: LRI severity, antibiotic treatment, and water intake. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2012; 13(4):376–383.
19. Spertus JA, Jones PG, Masoudi FA, Rumsfeld JS, Krumholz HM. Factors associated with racial differences in myocardial infarction outcomes. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 150(5):314–324.
20. Leon AC, Demirtas H, Li C, Hedeker D. Two propensity score-based strategies for a three-decade observational study: investigating psychotropic medications and suicide risk. Statistics in Medicine. 2012; 31(27):3255–3260.
21. Leon AC, Solomon DA, Li C, Fiedorowicz JG, Coryell WH, Endicott J, Keller MB. Antiepileptic drugs for bipolar disorder and the risk of suicidal behavior: a 30-year observational study. The American Journal of Psychiatry. 2012; 169(3):285–291.
22. Rosenbaum PR. Model-based direct adjustment. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1987; 82:387–394.
23. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1984; 79:516–524.
24. Austin PC. A tutorial and case study in propensity score analysis: an application to estimating the effect of in-hospital smoking cessation counseling on mortality. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2011; 46:119–151.
25. Austin PC. An introduction to propensity-score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2011; 46:399–424.
26. Ho DE, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA. Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis. 2007; 15:199–236.
27. Ho DE, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA. MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. Journal of Statistical Software. 2011; 42(8).
28. Lin DY, Wei LJ. The robust inference for the proportional hazards model. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1989; 84(408):1074–1078.
29. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stastisics in Medicine. 2013; 32(16):2837–2849.
30. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies. Statistics in Medicine. 2010; 29(20):2137–2148.
31. Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharmaceutical Statistics. 2011; 10:150–161.
32. Austin PC, Grootendorst P, Normand SL, Anderson GM. Conditioning on the propensity score can result in biased estimation of common measures of treatment effect: a Monte Carlo study. Statistics in Medicine. 2007; 26(4):754–768.
33. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios. Statistics in Medicine. 2007; 26(16):3078–3094.
34. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2008; 61(6):537–545.
35. Austin PC, Small DS. The use of bootstrapping when using propensity-score matching without replacement: a simulation study. Statisics in Medicine. 2014; 33(24):4306–4319.
36. Bender R, Augustin T, Blettner M. Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models. Statistics in Medicine. 2005; 24(11):1713–1723.
37. Austin PC. A data-generation process for data with specified risk differences or numbers needed to treat. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation. 2010; 39:563–577.
38. Austin PC, Stafford J. The performance of two data-generation processes for data with specified marginal treatment odds ratios. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation. 2008; 37:1039–1051.
39. Gayat E, Resche-Rigon M, Mary JY, Porcher R. Propensity score applied to survival data analysis through proportional hazards models: a Monte Carlo study. Pharmaceutical Statistics. 2012; 11(3):222–229.
40. Lee DS, Austin PC, Rouleau JL, Liu PP, Naimark D, Tu JV. Predicting mortality among patients hospitalized for heart failure: derivation and validation of a clinical model. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2003; 290(19):2581–2587.
41. Austin PC, Grootendorst P, Anderson GM. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study. Statistics in Medicine. 2007; 26(4):734–753.
42. Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharmaceutical Statistics. 2010; 10:150–161.
43. Joffe MM, Ten Have TR, Feldman HI, Kimmel SE. Model selection, confounder control, and marginal structural models: review and new applications. The American Statistician. 2004; 58:272–279.
44. Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Statistics in Medicine. 2009; 28(25):3083–3107.
45. Mamdani M, Sykora K, Li P, Normand SL, Streiner DL, Austin PC, Rochon PA, Anderson GM. Reader's guide to critical appraisal of cohort studies: 2. Assessing potential for confounding. British Medical Journal. 2005; 330(7497):960–962.
46. Tu JV, Donovan LR, Lee DS, Wang JT, Austin PC, Alter DA, Ko DT. Effectiveness of public report cards for improving the quality of cardiac care: the EFFECT study: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2009; 302(21):2330–2337.
47. Tu JV, Donovan LR, Lee DS, Austin PC, Ko DT, Wang JT, Newman AM. Quality of cardiac care in Ontario, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, 2004.
48. Austin PC. The use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments. Stastisics in Medicine. 2014; 33(7):1242–1258.
49. Hansen BB, Klopfer SO. Optimal full matching and related designs via network flows. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics. 2006; 15:609–627.
50. Hill J, Reiter JP. Interval estimation for treatment effects using propensity score matching. Statistics in Medicine. 2006; 25(13):2230–2256.
51. Austin PC, Stuart EA. The performance of inverse probability of treatment weighting and full matching on the propensity score in the presence of model misspecification when estimating the effect of treatment on survival outcomes. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 2015.
52. Burton A, Altman DG, Royston P, Holder RL. The design of simulation studies in medical statistics. Statistics in Medicine. 2006; 25(24):4279–4292.
53. Franklin JM, Schneeweiss S, Polinski JM, Rassen JA. Plasmode simulation for the evaluation of pharmacoepidemiologic methods in complex healthcare databases. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis. 2014; 72:219–226.
54. Rubin DB. Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: application to the tobacco litigation. Health Services & Outcomes Research Methodology. 2001; 2:169–188.
55. Schafer JL, Kang J. Average causal effects from nonrandomized studies: a practical guide and simulated example. Psychological Methods. 2008; 13(4):279–313.
56. Kang J, Schafer J. Demystifying double robustness: a comparison of alternative strategies for estimating a population mean from incomplete data. Statistical Science. 2007; 22:523–580.
57. Rubin DB. On principles for modeling propensity scores in medical research. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 2004; 13(12):855–857.