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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Statistics in medicine 2005-09, Vol.24 (18), p.2777-2787 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
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 & 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 & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>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</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 & Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright 2005 John Wiley & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Sons, Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & 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 |