Transparency of high-dimensional propensity score analyses: Guidance for diagnostics and reporting

被引:11
|
作者
Tazare, John [1 ]
Wyss, Richard [2 ,3 ]
Franklin, Jessica M. [2 ,3 ]
Smeeth, Liam [1 ,4 ]
Evans, Stephen J. W. [1 ]
Wang, Shirley, V [2 ,3 ]
Schneeweiss, Sebastian [2 ,3 ]
Douglas, Ian J. [1 ,4 ]
Gagne, Joshua J. [2 ,3 ]
Williamson, Elizabeth J. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Fac Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, England
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Pharmacoepidemiol & Pharmacoecon, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Hlth Data Res HDR UK, London, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
confounder adjustment; database research; diagnostics; high dimensional propensity score; reporting; COVARIATE SELECTION; CONFOUNDING CONTROL; VARIABLE SELECTION; CLOPIDOGREL; ADJUSTMENT; BIAS;
D O I
10.1002/pds.5412
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose The high-dimensional propensity score (HDPS) is a semi-automated procedure for confounder identification, prioritisation and adjustment in large healthcare databases that requires investigators to specify data dimensions, prioritisation strategy and tuning parameters. In practice, reporting of these decisions is inconsistent and this can undermine the transparency, and reproducibility of results obtained. We illustrate reporting tools, graphical displays and sensitivity analyses to increase transparency and facilitate evaluation of the robustness of analyses involving HDPS. Methods Using a study from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink that implemented HDPS we demonstrate the application of the proposed recommendations. Results We identify seven considerations surrounding the implementation of HDPS, such as the identification of data dimensions, method for code prioritisation and number of variables selected. Graphical diagnostic tools include assessing the balance of key confounders before and after adjusting for empirically selected HDPS covariates and the identification of potentially influential covariates. Sensitivity analyses include varying the number of covariates selected and assessing the impact of covariates behaving empirically as instrumental variables. In our example, results were robust to both the number of covariates selected and the inclusion of potentially influential covariates. Furthermore, our HDPS models achieved good balance in key confounders. Conclusions The data-adaptive approach of HDPS and the resulting benefits have led to its popularity as a method for confounder adjustment in pharmacoepidemiological studies. Reporting of HDPS analyses in practice may be improved by the considerations and tools proposed here to increase the transparency and reproducibility of study results.
引用
收藏
页码:411 / 423
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Transparency of high-dimensional propensity score analyses: Guidance for diagnostics and reporting
    Tazare, John
    Wyss, Richard
    Franklin, Jessica M.
    Smeeth, Liam
    Evans, Stephen J. W.
    Wang, Shirley V.
    Schneeweiss, Sebastian
    Douglas, Ian J.
    Williamson, Elizabeth
    Gagne, Joshua J.
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2020, 29 : 387 - 387
  • [2] Evaluation of a Parsimonious High-Dimensional Propensity Score
    Rassen, Jeremy A.
    Schneeweiss, Sebastian
    Walker, Alexander M.
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2011, 20 : S1 - S1
  • [3] Covariate Selection in High-Dimensional Propensity Score Analyses of Treatment Effects in Small Samples
    Rassen, Jeremy A.
    Glynn, Robert J.
    Brookhart, M. Alan
    Schneeweiss, Sebastian
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 173 (12) : 1404 - 1413
  • [4] Head to head comparison of the propensity score and the high-dimensional propensity score matching methods
    Guertin, Jason R.
    Rahme, Elham
    Dormuth, Colin R.
    LeLorier, Jacques
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2016, 16
  • [5] Head to head comparison of the propensity score and the high-dimensional propensity score matching methods
    Jason R. Guertin
    Elham Rahme
    Colin R. Dormuth
    Jacques LeLorier
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16
  • [6] Regularized Regression Versus the High-Dimensional Propensity Score for Confounding Adjustment in Secondary Database Analyses
    Franklin, Jessica M.
    Eddings, Wesley
    Glynn, Robert J.
    Schneeweiss, Sebastian
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2015, 182 (07) : 651 - 659
  • [7] Performance of the High-dimensional Propensity Score in a Nordic Healthcare Model
    Hallas, Jesper
    Pottegard, Anton
    BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, 2017, 120 (03) : 312 - 317
  • [8] Performance of the high-dimensional propensity score in adjusting for unmeasured confounders
    Jason R Guertin
    Elham Rahme
    Jacques LeLorier
    European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2016, 72 : 1497 - 1505
  • [9] Performance of the high-dimensional propensity score in adjusting for unmeasured confounders
    Guertin, Jason R.
    Rahme, Elham
    LeLorier, Jacques
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2016, 72 (12) : 1497 - 1505
  • [10] High-dimensional generalized propensity score with application to omics data
    Gao, Qian
    Zhang, Yu
    Liang, Jie
    Sun, Hongwei
    Wang, Tong
    BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, 2021, 22 (06)