A Review of Propensity-Score Methods and Their Use in Cardiovascular Research

Canadian Journal of Cardiology

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 259-265

  Deb, Saswata ^a,b   Austin, Peter C ^b,c,d   Tu, Jack V ^a,b,c   Ko, Dennis T ^a,b,c   Mazer, C David ^e   Kiss, Alex ^d   Fremes, Stephen E ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c Institute of Clinical and Evaluative Sciences   (Canada)

^d Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre   (Canada)

^e ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COVARIANCE; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PROBABILITY; PROPENSITY SCORE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; STATISTICAL BIAS; STRATIFIED SAMPLE; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; CARDIOLOGY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLICATION; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CARDIOLOGY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PROPENSITY SCORE;

EID: 84959115499     PISSN: 0828282X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2015.05.015     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Sibbald B., Roland M. Understanding controlled trials. Why are randomised controlled trials important?. BMJ 1998, 316:201.
2. D'Agostino R.B. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 1998, 17:2265-2281.
3. Heinze G., Juni P. An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses. Eur Heart J 2011, 32:1704-1708.
4. D'Agostino R.B. Propensity scores in cardiovascular research. Circulation 2007, 115:2340-2343.
5. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983, 70:41-55.
6. Austin P.C. A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003. Stat Med 2008, 27:2037-2049.
7. James M.T., Tonelli M., Ghali W.A., et al. Renal outcomes associated with invasive vs conservative management of acute coronary syndrome: propensity matched cohort study. BMJ 2013, 347:f4151.
8. Tu J.V., Bowen J., Chiu M., et al. Effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents in Ontario. N Engl J Med 2007, 357:1393-1402.
9. Thuny F., Beurtheret S., Mancini J., et al. The timing of surgery influences mortality and morbidity in adults with severe complicated infective endocarditis: a propensity analysis. Eur Heart J 2011, 32:2027-2033.
10. Austin P.C. Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007, 134:1128-1135.
11. Austin P.C. Primer on statistical interpretation or methods. report card on propensity-score matching in the cardiology literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2008, 1:62-67.
12. Joffe M.M., Rosenbaum P.R. Invited commentary: propensity scores. Am J Epidemiol 1999, 150:327-333.
13. Austin P.C. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res 2011, 46:399-424.
14. Austin P.C. A tutorial and case study in propensity score analysis: an application to estimating the effect of in-hospital smoking cessation counseling on mortality. Multivariate Behav Res 2011, 46:119-151.
15. Austin P.C., Grootendorst P., Anderson G.M. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated participants: a Monte Carlo study. Stat Med 2007, 26:734-753.
16. Brookhart M.A., Schneeweiss S., Rothman K.J., et al. Variable selection for propensity score models. Am J Epidemiol 2006, 163:1149-1156.
17. Imbens G.W. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Rev Econ Stat 2004, 86:4-29.
18. Imai K, King G, Stuart EA. Misunderstandings among experimentalists and observationalists about causal inference. J R Stat Soc, Series A 171, part 2:481-502. Available at . Accessed Feb 24, 2015. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1013351.
19. Austin P.C. Goodness-of-fit diagnostics for the propensity-score model when estimating treatment effects using covariate adjustment with the propensity score. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2008, 17:1202-1217.
20. Austin P.C. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity score matched samples. Stat Med 2009, 28:3083-3107.
21. Westreich D., Cole S.R., Funk M.J., Brookhart M.A., Sturmer T. The role of the c-statistic in variable selection for propensity score models. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2011, 20:317-320.
22. Austin P.C. Optimal caliper widths for propensity score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharm Stat 2011, 10:150-161.
23. Ming K., Rosenbaum P.R. Substantial gains in bias reduction from matching with a variable number of controls. Biometrics 2000, 56:118-124.
24. Austin P.C. The use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments. Stat Med 2014, 33:1242-1258.
25. Rubin D.B. On principles for modeling propensity scores in medical research. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004, 13:855-857.
26. Austin P.C. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stat Med 2013, 32:2837-2849.
27. Austin P.C., Schuster T. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating absolute effects of treatments on survival outcomes: a simulation study. Stat Methods Med Res 2014, [e-pub ahead of print].
28. Angeloni E., Melina G., Benedetto U., et al. Metabolic syndrome affects midterm outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 2012, 93:537-544.
29. Austin P.C. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios. Stat Med 2007, 26:3078-3094.
30. Weintraub W.S., Grau-Sepulveda M.V., Weiss J.M., et al. Comparative effectiveness of revascularization strategies. N Engl J Med 2012, 366:1467-1476.
31. Austin P.C. The relative ability of different propensity score methods to balance measured covariates between treated and untreated participants in observational studies. Med Decis Making 2009, 29:661-677.
32. Austin P.C., Mamdani M.M., Stukel T.A., Anderson G.M., Tu J.V. The use of the propensity score for estimating treatment effects: administrative vs clinical data. Stat Med 2005, 24:1563-1578.