The use of the propensity score for estimating treatment effects: administrative versus clinical data

被引:177
作者
Austin, PC
Mamdani, MM
Stukel, TA
Anderson, GM
Tu, JV
机构
[1] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Fac Pharm, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
propensity score; pharmacoepidemiology; administrative data; unmeasured confounding-; acute myocardial infarction; statistical methods;
D O I
10.1002/sim.2053
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
There is an increasing interest in using administrative data to estimate the treatment effects of interventions. While administrative data are relatively inexpensive to obtain and provide population coverage, they are frequently characterized by lack of clinical detail, often leading to problematic confounding when they are used to conduct observational research. Propensity score methods are increasingly being used to address confounding in estimating the effects of interventions in such studies. Using data on patients discharged from hospital for whom both administrative data and detailed clinical data obtained from chart reviews were available, we examined the degree to which stratifying on the quintiles of propensity scores derived from administrative data was able to balance patient characteristics measured in clinical data. We also determined the extent to which measures of treatment effect obtained using propensity score methods were similar to those obtained using traditional regression methods. As a test case, we examined the treatment effects of ASA and beta-blockers following acute myocardial infarction. We demonstrated that propensity scores developed using administrative data do not necessarily balance patient characteristics contained in clinical data. Furthermore, measures of treatment effectiveness were attenuated when obtained using clinical data compared to when administrative data were used. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1563 / 1578
页数:16
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Angrist JD, 1996, J AM STAT ASSOC, V91, P444, DOI 10.2307/2291629
  • [2] Bootstrap methods for developing predictive models
    Austin, PC
    Tu, JV
    [J]. AMERICAN STATISTICIAN, 2004, 58 (02) : 131 - 137
  • [3] Rare outcomes, common treatments: Analytic strategies using propensity scores
    Braitman, LE
    Rosenbaum, PR
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2002, 137 (08) : 693 - 695
  • [4] EFFECTIVENESS OF ADJUSTMENT BY SUBCLASSIFICATION IN REMOVING BIAS IN OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES
    COCHRAN, WG
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 1968, 24 (02) : 295 - &
  • [5] The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients
    Connors, AF
    Speroff, T
    Dawson, NV
    Thomas, C
    Harrell, FE
    Wagner, D
    Desbiens, N
    Goldman, L
    Wu, AW
    Califf, RM
    Fulkerson, WJ
    Vidaillet, H
    Broste, S
    Bellamy, P
    Lynn, J
    Knaus, WA
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 276 (11): : 889 - 897
  • [6] D'Agostino RB, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P2265, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::AID-SIM918>3.0.CO
  • [7] 2-B
  • [8] Primary angioplasty and selection bias in patients presenting late (⟩12 h) after onset of chest pain and ST elevation myocardial infarction
    Elad, Y
    French, WJ
    Shavelle, DM
    Parsons, LS
    Sada, MJ
    Every, NR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2002, 39 (05) : 826 - 833
  • [9] β Blockade after myocardial infarction:: systematic review and meta regression analysis
    Freemantle, N
    Cleland, J
    Young, P
    Mason, J
    Harrison, J
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7200): : 1730 - 1737
  • [10] Joffe MM, 1999, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V150, P327