Literature DB >> 19487948

High-dimensional propensity score adjustment in studies of treatment effects using health care claims data.

Sebastian Schneeweiss1, Jeremy A Rassen, Robert J Glynn, Jerry Avorn, Helen Mogun, M Alan Brookhart.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adjusting for large numbers of covariates ascertained from patients' health care claims data may improve control of confounding, as these variables may collectively be proxies for unobserved factors. Here, we develop and test an algorithm that empirically identifies candidate covariates, prioritizes covariates, and integrates them into a propensity-score-based confounder adjustment model.
METHODS: We developed a multistep algorithm to implement high-dimensional proxy adjustment in claims data. Steps include (1) identifying data dimensions, eg, diagnoses, procedures, and medications; (2) empirically identifying candidate covariates; (3) assessing recurrence of codes; (4) prioritizing covariates; (5) selecting covariates for adjustment; (6) estimating the exposure propensity score; and (7) estimating an outcome model. This algorithm was tested in Medicare claims data, including a study on the effect of Cox-2 inhibitors on reduced gastric toxicity compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
RESULTS: In a population of 49,653 new users of Cox-2 inhibitors or nonselective NSAIDs, a crude relative risk (RR) for upper GI toxicity (RR = 1.09 [95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.30]) was initially observed. Adjusting for 15 predefined covariates resulted in a possible gastroprotective effect (0.94 [0.78-1.12]). A gastroprotective effect became stronger when adjusting for an additional 500 algorithm-derived covariates (0.88 [0.73-1.06]). Results of a study on the effect of statin on reduced mortality were similar. Using the algorithm adjustment confirmed a null finding between influenza vaccination and hip fracture (1.02 [0.85-1.21]).
CONCLUSIONS: In typical pharmacoepidemiologic studies, the proposed high-dimensional propensity score resulted in improved effect estimates compared with adjustment limited to predefined covariates, when benchmarked against results expected from randomized trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19487948      PMCID: PMC3077219          DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181a663cc

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  33 in total

1.  Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians.

Authors:  J Carpenter; J Bithell
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The validity of medicaid pharmacy claims for estimating drug use among elderly nursing home residents: The Oregon experience.

Authors:  D A McKenzie; J Semradek; B H McFarland; J P Mullooly; L E McCamant
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias.

Authors:  Sander Greenland
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Use of propensity score technique to account for exposure-related covariates: an example and lesson.

Authors:  John D Seeger; Tobias Kurth; Alexander M Walker
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Invited commentary: variable selection versus shrinkage in the control of multiple confounders.

Authors:  Sander Greenland
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-01-27       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Impact of mis-specification of the treatment model on estimates from a marginal structural model.

Authors:  Geneviève Lefebvre; Joseph A C Delaney; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Spurious effects from an extraneous variable.

Authors:  I D Bross
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1966-06

8.  Gastrointestinal tolerability of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor rofecoxib compared with nonselective COX-1 and COX-2 inhibitors in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  D J Watson; S E Harper; P L Zhao; H Quan; J A Bolognese; T J Simon
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2000-10-23

9.  Relationship between selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and acute myocardial infarction in older adults.

Authors:  Daniel H Solomon; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Robert J Glynn; Yuka Kiyota; Raisa Levin; Helen Mogun; Jerry Avorn
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2004-04-19       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Evaluating medication effects outside of clinical trials: new-user designs.

Authors:  Wayne A Ray
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2003-11-01       Impact factor: 4.897

View more
  348 in total

1.  Applying propensity scores estimated in a full cohort to adjust for confounding in subgroup analyses.

Authors:  Jeremy A Rassen; Robert J Glynn; Kenneth J Rothman; Soko Setoguchi; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 2.890

2.  Comparison of different approaches to confounding adjustment in a study on the association of antipsychotic medication with mortality in older nursing home patients.

Authors:  Krista F Huybrechts; M Alan Brookhart; Kenneth J Rothman; Rebecca A Silliman; Tobias Gerhard; Stephen Crystal; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Effects of adjusting for instrumental variables on bias and precision of effect estimates.

Authors:  Jessica A Myers; Jeremy A Rassen; Joshua J Gagne; Krista F Huybrechts; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Kenneth J Rothman; Marshall M Joffe; Robert J Glynn
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-10-24       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 4.  Do observational studies using propensity score methods agree with randomized trials? A systematic comparison of studies on acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  Issa J Dahabreh; Radley C Sheldrick; Jessica K Paulus; Mei Chung; Vasileia Varvarigou; Haseeb Jafri; Jeremy A Rassen; Thomas A Trikalinos; Georgios D Kitsios
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2012-06-17       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  High-dimensional versus conventional propensity scores in a comparative effectiveness study of coxibs and reduced upper gastrointestinal complications.

Authors:  E Garbe; S Kloss; M Suling; I Pigeot; S Schneeweiss
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  A novel approach for propensity score matching and stratification for multiple treatments: Application to an electronic health record-derived study.

Authors:  Derek W Brown; Stacia M DeSantis; Thomas J Greene; Vahed Maroufy; Ashraf Yaseen; Hulin Wu; George Williams; Michael D Swartz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Plasmode simulation for the evaluation of pharmacoepidemiologic methods in complex healthcare databases.

Authors:  Jessica M Franklin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jennifer M Polinski; Jeremy A Rassen
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.681

8.  An evaluation of the THIN database in the OMOP Common Data Model for active drug safety surveillance.

Authors:  Xiaofeng Zhou; Sundaresan Murugesan; Harshvinder Bhullar; Qing Liu; Bing Cai; Chuck Wentworth; Andrew Bate
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Propensity scores for confounder adjustment when assessing the effects of medical interventions using nonexperimental study designs.

Authors:  T Stürmer; R Wyss; R J Glynn; M A Brookhart
Journal:  J Intern Med       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 8.989

Review 10.  Propensity score methods to control for confounding in observational cohort studies: a statistical primer and application to endoscopy research.

Authors:  Jeff Y Yang; Michael Webster-Clark; Jennifer L Lund; Robert S Sandler; Evan S Dellon; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 9.427

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.