Literature DB >> 27037270

Comparison of Calipers for Matching on the Disease Risk Score.

John G Connolly, Joshua J Gagne.   

Abstract

Previous studies have compared calipers for propensity score (PS) matching, but none have considered calipers for matching on the disease risk score (DRS). We used Medicare claims data to perform 3 cohort studies of medication initiators: a study of raloxifene versus alendronate in 1-year nonvertebral fracture risk, a study of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors versus nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications in 6-month gastrointestinal bleeding, and a study of simvastatin + ezetimibe versus simvastatin alone in 6-month cardiovascular outcomes. The study periods for each cohort were 1998 through 2005, 1999 through 2002, and 2004 through 2005, respectively. In each cohort, we calculated 1) a DRS, 2) a prognostic PS which included the DRS as the independent variable in a PS model, and 3) the PS for each patient. We then nearest-neighbor matched on each score in a variable ratio and a fixed ratio within 8 calipers based on the standard deviation of the logit and the natural score scale. When variable ratio matching on the DRS, a caliper of 0.05 on the natural scale performed poorly when the outcome was rare. The prognostic PS did not appear to offer any consistent practical benefits over matching on the DRS directly. In general, logit-based calipers or calipers smaller than 0.05 on the natural scale performed well when DRS matching in all examples.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  calipers; cohort studies; confounding (epidemiology); disease risk score; epidemiologic methods; matching; prognostic propensity score; propensity score

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27037270      PMCID: PMC4867154          DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwv302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  18 in total

Review 1.  A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Primer on statistical interpretation or methods report card on propensity-score matching in the cardiology literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2008-09

3.  Positive predictive value of ICD-9 codes in the identification of cases of complicated peptic ulcer disease in the Saskatchewan hospital automated database.

Authors:  D S Raiford; S Pérez Gutthann; L A García Rodríguez
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  A combined comorbidity score predicted mortality in elderly patients better than existing scores.

Authors:  Joshua J Gagne; Robert J Glynn; Jerry Avorn; Raisa Levin; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  On the joint use of propensity and prognostic scores in estimation of the average treatment effect on the treated: a simulation study.

Authors:  Finbarr P Leacy; Elizabeth A Stuart
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Identification of fractures from computerized Medicare files.

Authors:  W A Ray; M R Griffin; R L Fought; M L Adams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Matching on the disease risk score in comparative effectiveness research of new treatments.

Authors:  Richard Wyss; Alan R Ellis; M Alan Brookhart; Michele Jonsson Funk; Cynthia J Girman; Ross J Simpson; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Confounder summary scores when comparing the effects of multiple drug exposures.

Authors:  Suzanne M Cadarette; Joshua J Gagne; Daniel H Solomon; Jeffrey N Katz; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 9.  Tolerability and adverse events in clinical trials of celecoxib in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of information from company clinical trial reports.

Authors:  R Andrew Moore; Sheena Derry; Geoffrey T Makinson; Henry J McQuay
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2005-03-24       Impact factor: 5.156

Review 10.  Alendronate versus Raloxifene for Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-Analysis of Seven Head-to-Head Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Tiao Lin; Shi-Gui Yan; Xun-Zi Cai; Zhi-Min Ying; Fu-Zhen Yuan; Xi Zuo
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2014-01-05       Impact factor: 3.257

View more
  2 in total

1.  The "Dry-Run" Analysis: A Method for Evaluating Risk Scores for Confounding Control.

Authors:  Richard Wyss; Ben B Hansen; Alan R Ellis; Joshua J Gagne; Rishi J Desai; Robert J Glynn; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Protocol for a mixed-methods and multi-site assessment of the implementation process and outcomes of a new community-based frailty programme.

Authors:  Woan Shin Tan; Ze Ling Nai; Hwee Teng Robyn Tan; Sean Nicholas; Robin Choo; Mimaika Luluina Ginting; Edward Tan; Poh Hoon June Teng; Wee Shiong Lim; Chek Hooi Wong; Yew Yoong Ding
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 4.070

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.