The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances

The propensity score has been proposed, and for the most part accepted, as a tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of baseline imbalances arising in the context of observational studies. The lack of an analogous tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interven...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Statistics in medicine 2005-09, Vol.24 (18), p.2777-2787
1. Verfasser: Berger, Vance W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2787
container_issue 18
container_start_page 2777
container_title Statistics in medicine
container_volume 24
creator Berger, Vance W.
description The propensity score has been proposed, and for the most part accepted, as a tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of baseline imbalances arising in the context of observational studies. The lack of an analogous tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in randomized trials has required the use of ad hoc methods. This, in turn, leads to challenges to the conclusions. For example, much of the controversy surrounding recommendations for or against mammography for some age groups stems from the fact that all the randomized trials to study mammography had baseline imbalances, to some extent, in important prognostic covariates. While some of these trials used cluster randomization, baseline imbalances are prevalent also in individually randomized trials. We provide a systematic approach for evaluating medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in individually randomized trials with allocation concealment. Specifically, we define the reverse propensity score as the probability, conditional on all previous allocations and the allocation procedure (restrictions on the randomization), that a given patient will receive a given treatment. We demonstrate how the reverse propensity score allows for both detection of and correction for selection bias, or systematic baseline imbalances. Published in 2005 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/sim.2141
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68560727</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68560727</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3841-b25e5e63e2a5c6ca6c0032ae4d9707fff356ebad90183279fc2a44c486ca630c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10EtLxDAUBeAgio4P8BdIcCFuqnk0TbuUwVGZUReO-NiENL3FaB9j0lHn35thioLg6i7ux-FwENqn5IQSwk69rU8YjekaGlCSyYgwka6jAWFSRomkYgtte_9KCKWCyU20RUWWUk7EAD1NXwA7-ADnAc9cO4PG226BvWkd4K7FBXRgOuyhCse2Dc6t9lg3BQ7CLV9l63CuA7ANYFvnutKNAb-LNkpdedjr7w66H51Ph5fR5Pbiang2iQxPYxrlTICAhAPTwiRGJ4YQzjTERSaJLMuSiwRyXWSEppzJrDRMx7GJ06XlxPAddLTKDe3f5-A7VVtvoAotoJ17laQiIZLJAA__wNd27prQTTHGw3pS8oCOV8i41nsHpZo5W2u3UJSo5dYqbK2WWwd60OfN8xqKX9iPG0C0Ap-2gsW_Qeru6roP7L31HXz9eO3eVCK5FOrh5kKNh89yzKcj9ci_AXzcl0w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>223141773</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Berger, Vance W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Berger, Vance W.</creatorcontrib><description>The propensity score has been proposed, and for the most part accepted, as a tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of baseline imbalances arising in the context of observational studies. The lack of an analogous tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in randomized trials has required the use of ad hoc methods. This, in turn, leads to challenges to the conclusions. For example, much of the controversy surrounding recommendations for or against mammography for some age groups stems from the fact that all the randomized trials to study mammography had baseline imbalances, to some extent, in important prognostic covariates. While some of these trials used cluster randomization, baseline imbalances are prevalent also in individually randomized trials. We provide a systematic approach for evaluating medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in individually randomized trials with allocation concealment. Specifically, we define the reverse propensity score as the probability, conditional on all previous allocations and the allocation procedure (restrictions on the randomization), that a given patient will receive a given treatment. We demonstrate how the reverse propensity score allows for both detection of and correction for selection bias, or systematic baseline imbalances. Published in 2005 by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0277-6715</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0258</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/sim.2141</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15981305</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SMEDDA</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>allocation concealment ; balancing score ; Bias ; Biometry ; Clinical trials ; covariate adjustment ; Female ; Humans ; Mammography - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Medical research ; Models, Statistical ; Patient Selection ; Prognosis ; Random Allocation ; randomized clinical trials ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Statistical analysis</subject><ispartof>Statistics in medicine, 2005-09, Vol.24 (18), p.2777-2787</ispartof><rights>This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the U.S.A. Published in 2005 by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright 2005 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright John Wiley and Sons, Limited Sep 30, 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3841-b25e5e63e2a5c6ca6c0032ae4d9707fff356ebad90183279fc2a44c486ca630c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3841-b25e5e63e2a5c6ca6c0032ae4d9707fff356ebad90183279fc2a44c486ca630c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fsim.2141$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fsim.2141$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45552,45553</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15981305$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Berger, Vance W.</creatorcontrib><title>The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances</title><title>Statistics in medicine</title><addtitle>Statist. Med</addtitle><description>The propensity score has been proposed, and for the most part accepted, as a tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of baseline imbalances arising in the context of observational studies. The lack of an analogous tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in randomized trials has required the use of ad hoc methods. This, in turn, leads to challenges to the conclusions. For example, much of the controversy surrounding recommendations for or against mammography for some age groups stems from the fact that all the randomized trials to study mammography had baseline imbalances, to some extent, in important prognostic covariates. While some of these trials used cluster randomization, baseline imbalances are prevalent also in individually randomized trials. We provide a systematic approach for evaluating medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in individually randomized trials with allocation concealment. Specifically, we define the reverse propensity score as the probability, conditional on all previous allocations and the allocation procedure (restrictions on the randomization), that a given patient will receive a given treatment. We demonstrate how the reverse propensity score allows for both detection of and correction for selection bias, or systematic baseline imbalances. Published in 2005 by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</description><subject>allocation concealment</subject><subject>balancing score</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Biometry</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>covariate adjustment</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mammography - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Models, Statistical</subject><subject>Patient Selection</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Random Allocation</subject><subject>randomized clinical trials</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><issn>0277-6715</issn><issn>1097-0258</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp10EtLxDAUBeAgio4P8BdIcCFuqnk0TbuUwVGZUReO-NiENL3FaB9j0lHn35thioLg6i7ux-FwENqn5IQSwk69rU8YjekaGlCSyYgwka6jAWFSRomkYgtte_9KCKWCyU20RUWWUk7EAD1NXwA7-ADnAc9cO4PG226BvWkd4K7FBXRgOuyhCse2Dc6t9lg3BQ7CLV9l63CuA7ANYFvnutKNAb-LNkpdedjr7w66H51Ph5fR5Pbiang2iQxPYxrlTICAhAPTwiRGJ4YQzjTERSaJLMuSiwRyXWSEppzJrDRMx7GJ06XlxPAddLTKDe3f5-A7VVtvoAotoJ17laQiIZLJAA__wNd27prQTTHGw3pS8oCOV8i41nsHpZo5W2u3UJSo5dYqbK2WWwd60OfN8xqKX9iPG0C0Ap-2gsW_Qeru6roP7L31HXz9eO3eVCK5FOrh5kKNh89yzKcj9ci_AXzcl0w</recordid><startdate>20050930</startdate><enddate>20050930</enddate><creator>Berger, Vance W.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050930</creationdate><title>The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances</title><author>Berger, Vance W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3841-b25e5e63e2a5c6ca6c0032ae4d9707fff356ebad90183279fc2a44c486ca630c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>allocation concealment</topic><topic>balancing score</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Biometry</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>covariate adjustment</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mammography - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Models, Statistical</topic><topic>Patient Selection</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Random Allocation</topic><topic>randomized clinical trials</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Berger, Vance W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Statistics in medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Berger, Vance W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances</atitle><jtitle>Statistics in medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Statist. Med</addtitle><date>2005-09-30</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>18</issue><spage>2777</spage><epage>2787</epage><pages>2777-2787</pages><issn>0277-6715</issn><eissn>1097-0258</eissn><coden>SMEDDA</coden><abstract>The propensity score has been proposed, and for the most part accepted, as a tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of baseline imbalances arising in the context of observational studies. The lack of an analogous tool to allow for the evaluation of medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in randomized trials has required the use of ad hoc methods. This, in turn, leads to challenges to the conclusions. For example, much of the controversy surrounding recommendations for or against mammography for some age groups stems from the fact that all the randomized trials to study mammography had baseline imbalances, to some extent, in important prognostic covariates. While some of these trials used cluster randomization, baseline imbalances are prevalent also in individually randomized trials. We provide a systematic approach for evaluating medical interventions in the presence of potentially systematic baseline imbalances in individually randomized trials with allocation concealment. Specifically, we define the reverse propensity score as the probability, conditional on all previous allocations and the allocation procedure (restrictions on the randomization), that a given patient will receive a given treatment. We demonstrate how the reverse propensity score allows for both detection of and correction for selection bias, or systematic baseline imbalances. Published in 2005 by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>15981305</pmid><doi>10.1002/sim.2141</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0277-6715
ispartof Statistics in medicine, 2005-09, Vol.24 (18), p.2777-2787
issn 0277-6715
1097-0258
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68560727
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects allocation concealment
balancing score
Bias
Biometry
Clinical trials
covariate adjustment
Female
Humans
Mammography - statistics & numerical data
Medical research
Models, Statistical
Patient Selection
Prognosis
Random Allocation
randomized clinical trials
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data
Statistical analysis
title The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T09%3A21%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20reverse%20propensity%20score%20to%20detect%20selection%20bias%20and%20correct%20for%20baseline%20imbalances&rft.jtitle=Statistics%20in%20medicine&rft.au=Berger,%20Vance%20W.&rft.date=2005-09-30&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=18&rft.spage=2777&rft.epage=2787&rft.pages=2777-2787&rft.issn=0277-6715&rft.eissn=1097-0258&rft.coden=SMEDDA&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/sim.2141&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68560727%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=223141773&rft_id=info:pmid/15981305&rfr_iscdi=true