Propensity score weighting for a continuous exposure with multilevel data

被引:38
作者
Schuler M.S. [1 ]
Chu W. [2 ]
Coffman D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Avenue, Boston, 02215, MA
[2] Google, Inc., Mountain View, 94043, CA
[3] Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Temple University, Philadelphia, 19122, PA
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Continuous exposure; Multilevel data; Observational study; Propensity score;
D O I
10.1007/s10742-016-0157-5
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Propensity score methods (e.g., matching, weighting, subclassification) provide a statistical approach for balancing dissimilar exposure groups on baseline covariates. These methods were developed in the context of data with no hierarchical structure or clustering. Yet in many applications the data have a clustered structure that is of substantive importance, such as when individuals are nested within healthcare providers or within schools. Recent work has extended propensity score methods to a multilevel setting, primarily focusing on binary exposures. In this paper, we focus on propensity score weighting for a continuous, rather than binary, exposure in a multilevel setting. Using simulations, we compare several specifications of the propensity score: a random effects model, a fixed effects model, and a single-level model. Additionally, our simulations compare the performance of marginal versus cluster-mean stabilized propensity score weights. In our results, regression specifications that accounted for the multilevel structure reduced bias, particularly when cluster-level confounders were omitted. Furthermore, cluster mean weights outperformed marginal weights. © 2016, Springer Science+Business Media New York.
引用
收藏
页码:271 / 292
页数:21
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]  
Almirall D., Griffin B.A., McCaffrey D.F., Ramchand R., Yuen R.A., Murphy S.A., Time-varying effect moderation using the structural nested mean model: estimation using inverse-weighted regression with residuals, Stat. Med., 33, 20, pp. 3466-3487, (2014)
[2]  
Arpino B., Mealli F., The specification of the propensity score in multilevel observational studies, Comput. Stat. Data Anal., 55, 4, pp. 1770-1780, (2011)
[3]  
Austin P.C., An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies, Multivar. Behav. Res., 46, 3, pp. 399-424, (2011)
[4]  
Bates D., Machler M., Bolker B., Walker S., Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4, J. Stat. Softw., 67, 1, pp. 1-48, (2015)
[5]  
Cohen J., Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, (1988)
[6]  
Cole S.R., Hernan M.A., Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models, Am. J. Epidemiol., 168, 6, pp. 656-664, (2008)
[7]  
Eckardt P., Propensity score estimates in multilevel models for causal inference, Nurs. Res., 61, 3, pp. 213-223, (2012)
[8]  
Fonarow G.C., Zhao X., Smith E.E., Et al., Door-to-needle times for tissue plasminogen activator administration and clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke before and after a quality improvement initiative, J. Am. Med. Assoc., 311, 16, pp. 1632-1640, (2014)
[9]  
Fuller G., Hasler R.M., Mealing N., Lawrence T., Woodford M., Juni P., Lecky F., The association between admission systolic blood pressure and mortality in significant traumatic brain injury: a multi-centre cohort study, Injury, 45, 3, pp. 612-617, (2014)
[10]  
Greenland S., Robins J.M., Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding, Int. J. Epidemiol., 15, 3, pp. 413-419, (1986)