The Causal Inference Framework: A Primer on Concepts and Methods for Improving the Study of Well-Woman Childbearing Processes

被引:19
作者
Tilden, Ellen L. [1 ]
Snowden, Jonathan M. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Sch Nursing, 5S,3455 SW US Vet Rd, Portland, OR 97239 USA
[2] OHSU, Portland, OR USA
[3] Portland State Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Portland, OR 97207 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
causal inference framework; directed acyclic graphs; midwifery science; observational studies; physiologic childbearing science; primer; propensity score analysis; secondary data analysis; PROPENSITY-SCORE; PROSPECTIVE COHORT; BIRTH; NEIGHBORHOOD; EQUIPOISE; CARE; DISADVANTAGE; POSITIVITY; DIAGRAMS; MODELS;
D O I
10.1111/jmwh.12710
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
The causal inference framework and related methods have emerged as vital within epidemiology. Scientists in many fields have found that this framework and a variety of designs and analytic approaches facilitate the conduct of strong science. These approaches have proven particularly important for catalyzing knowledge development using existing data and addressing questions for which randomized clinical trials are neither feasible nor ethical. The study of healthy women and normal childbearing processes may benefit from more direct and deliberate engagement with the process of inferring causes and, further, may be strengthened through use of methods appropriate for this undertaking. The purpose of this primer, the first in a series of 3 articles, is to provide the reader an introduction to concepts and methods relevant for causal inference, aimed at the clinician scientist and offer details and references supporting further application of epidemiologic knowledge. The causal inference framework and associated methods hold promise for generating strong, broadly representative, and actionable science to improve the outcomes of healthy women during the childbearing cycle and their children. (C) 2018 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.
引用
收藏
页码:700 / 709
页数:10
相关论文
共 64 条
[2]  
[Anonymous], J MIDWIFERY WOMENS H
[3]  
[Anonymous], J MIDWIFERY WOMENS H
[4]  
[Anonymous], LANCET
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2015, HORMONAL PHYSL CHILD
[6]   A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2014, 33 (06) :1057-1069
[7]   The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2010, 29 (20) :2137-2148
[8]   Adaptive pre-specification in randomized trials with and without pair-matching [J].
Balzer, Laura B. ;
van der Laan, Mark J. ;
Petersen, Maya L. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2016, 35 (25) :4528-4545
[9]   Assessing the Gold Standard - Lessons from the History of RCTs [J].
Bothwell, Laura E. ;
Greene, Jeremy A. ;
Podolsky, Scott H. ;
Jones, David S. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2016, 374 (22) :2175-2181
[10]   The scale, scope, coverage, and capability of childbirth care [J].
Campbell, Oona M. R. ;
Calvert, Clara ;
Testa, Adrienne ;
Strehlow, Matthew ;
Benova, Lenka ;
Keyes, Emily ;
Donnay, France ;
Macleod, David ;
Gabrysch, Sabine ;
Rong, Luo ;
Ronsmans, Carine ;
Sadruddin, Salim ;
Koblinsky, Marge ;
Bailey, Patricia .
LANCET, 2016, 388 (10056) :2193-2208