Advanced Statistics: Multiple Logistic Regression, Cox Proportional Hazards, and Propensity Scores

被引:26
作者
Cioci, Alessia C. [1 ]
Cioci, Anthony L. [2 ]
Mantero, Alejandro M. A. [1 ]
Parreco, Joshua P. [3 ]
Yeh, D. Dante [1 ]
Rattan, Rishi [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Miller Sch Med, 1800 NW 10th Ave,T215,D-42, Miami, FL 33136 USA
[2] Wake Forest Sch Med, Winston Salem, NC 27101 USA
[3] Florida State Univ, Coll Med, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA
关键词
logistic regression; propensity score; proportional hazards; statistics; PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS; INFECTION; SURVIVAL; EVENTS; PREDICTION; SURGERY; NUMBER;
D O I
10.1089/sur.2020.425
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are generally regarded as the gold standard for demonstrating causality because they effectively mitigate bias from both known and unknown confounders. However, conducting an RCT is not always feasible because of logistical and ethical considerations. This is especially true when evaluating surgical interventions, and non-randomized study designs must be utilized instead. Methods: Statistical methods that adjust for baseline differences in non-randomized studies were reviewed. Results: The three methods used most commonly to adjust for confounding factors are multiple logistic regression, Cox proportional hazard, and propensity scoring. Multiple logistic regression (MLR) is implemented to analyze the influence of categorical and/or continuous variables on a single dichotomous outcome. The model controls for multiple covariates while also quantifying the magnitude of each covariate's influence on the outcome. Selecting which variables to include in a model should be the most important consideration, and authors must report how and why variables were chosen. Cox proportional hazards modeling is conceptually similar to logistic regression and is used when analyzing survival data. When applied to survival curves, Cox proportional hazards can adjust for baseline group differences and provide a hazard ratio to quantify the effect that any single factor contributes to the survival curve. Propensity scores (PS) range from zero to one and are defined as the probability of receiving an intervention based on observed baseline characteristics. Propensity score matching (PSM) is especially useful when the outcome of interest is a rare event. Treated and untreated subjects with similar propensity scores are paired, forming balanced samples for further analysis. Conclusions: The method by which to address confounding should be selected according to the data format and sample size. Reporting of methods should provide justification for selected covariates, confirmation that data did not violate model assumptions, and measures of model performance.
引用
收藏
页码:604 / 610
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Aggarwal Rakesh, 2017, Perspect Clin Res, V8, P100, DOI 10.4103/2229-3485.203040
[2]   Discrimination and Calibration of Clinical Prediction Models Users' Guides to the Medical Literature [J].
Alba, Ana Carolina ;
Agoritsas, Thomas ;
Walsh, Michael ;
Hanna, Steven ;
Iorio, Alfonso ;
Devereaux, P. J. ;
McGinn, Thomas ;
Guyatt, Gordon .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2017, 318 (14) :1377-1384
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2000, Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice
[4]   A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2014, 33 (06) :1057-1069
[5]   An Introduction to Propensity Score Methods for Reducing the Effects of Confounding in Observational Studies [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2011, 46 (03) :399-424
[6]   Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2011, 10 (02) :150-161
[7]   Statistical Criteria for Selecting the Optimal Number of Untreated Subjects Matched to Each Treated Subject When Using Many-to-One Matching on the Propensity Score [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 172 (09) :1092-1097
[8]   Basic Introduction to Statistics in Medicine, Part 2: Comparing Data [J].
Bensken, Wyatt P. ;
Ho, Vanessa P. ;
Pieracci, Fredric M. .
SURGICAL INFECTIONS, 2021, 22 (06) :597-603
[9]   Are propensity scores really superior to standard multivariable analysis? [J].
Biondi-Zoccai, Giuseppe ;
Romagnoli, Enrico ;
Agostoni, Pierfrancesco ;
Capodanno, Davide ;
Castagno, Davide ;
D'Ascenzo, Fabrizio ;
Sangiorgi, Giuseppe ;
Modena, Maria Grazia .
CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2011, 32 (05) :731-740
[10]   Survival Analysis Part II: Multivariate data analysis - an introduction to concepts and methods [J].
Bradburn, MJ ;
Clark, TG ;
Love, SB ;
Altman, DG .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2003, 89 (03) :431-436