Literature DB >> 29145767

Addressing geographic confounding through spatial propensity scores: a study of racial disparities in diabetes.

Melanie L Davis1, Brian Neelon1, Paul J Nietert1, Kelly J Hunt1, Lane F Burgette2, Andrew B Lawson1, Leonard E Egede3.   

Abstract

Motivated by a study exploring differences in glycemic control between non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white veterans with type 2 diabetes, we aim to address a type of confounding that arises in spatially referenced observational studies. Specifically, we develop a spatial doubly robust propensity score estimator to reduce bias associated with geographic confounding, which occurs when measured or unmeasured confounding factors vary by geographic location, leading to imbalanced group comparisons. We augment the doubly robust estimator with spatial random effects, which are assigned conditionally autoregressive priors to improve inferences by borrowing information across neighboring geographic regions. Through a series of simulations, we show that ignoring spatial variation results in increased absolute bias and mean squared error, while the spatial doubly robust estimator performs well under various levels of spatial heterogeneity and moderate sample sizes. In the motivating application, we construct three global estimates of the risk difference between race groups: an unadjusted estimate, a doubly robust estimate that adjusts only for patient-level information, and a hierarchical spatial doubly robust estimate. Results indicate a gradual reduction in the risk difference at each stage, with the inclusion of spatial random effects providing a 20% reduction compared to an estimate that ignores spatial heterogeneity. Smoothed maps indicate poor glycemic control across Alabama and southern Georgia, areas comprising the so-called "stroke belt." These results suggest the need for community-specific interventions to target diabetes in geographic areas of greatest need.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diabetes control; doubly robust estimator; geographic confounding; health disparities; propensity scores; spatial data analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29145767      PMCID: PMC6764100          DOI: 10.1177/0962280217735700

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  26 in total

1.  Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.

Authors:  Jared K Lunceford; Marie Davidian
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Doubly robust estimation in missing data and causal inference models.

Authors:  Heejung Bang; James M Robins
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  When does a difference become a disparity? Conceptualizing racial and ethnic disparities in health.

Authors:  Paul L Hebert; Jane E Sisk; Elizabeth A Howell
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

4.  Bayesian propensity score analysis for observational data.

Authors:  Lawrence C McCandless; Paul Gustafson; Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Self-efficacy, problem solving, and social-environmental support are associated with diabetes self-management behaviors.

Authors:  Diane K King; Russell E Glasgow; Deborah J Toobert; Lisa A Strycker; Paul A Estabrooks; Diego Osuna; Andrew J Faber
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 17.152

6.  Adjusting for unmeasured spatial confounding with distance adjusted propensity score matching.

Authors:  Georgia Papadogeorgou; Christine Choirat; Corwin M Zigler
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 5.899

7.  Racial differences in spatial patterns for poor glycemic control in the Southeastern United States.

Authors:  Rebekah J Walker; Brian Neelon; Melanie Davis; Leonard E Egede
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 3.797

8.  Is the risk of diabetic retinopathy greater in non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican Americans than in non-Hispanic whites with type 2 diabetes? A U.S. population study.

Authors:  M I Harris; R Klein; C C Cowie; M Rowland; D D Byrd-Holt
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  Propensity score weighting with multilevel data.

Authors:  Fan Li; Alan M Zaslavsky; Mary Beth Landrum
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-03-24       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Mortality in adults with and without diabetes in a national cohort of the U.S. population, 1971-1993.

Authors:  K Gu; C C Cowie; M I Harris
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  3 in total

1.  Selecting a Scale for Spatial Confounding Adjustment.

Authors:  Joshua P Keller; Adam A Szpiro
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 2.483

2.  Exposure to industrial hog operations and gastrointestinal illness in North Carolina, USA.

Authors:  Arbor J L Quist; David A Holcomb; Mike Dolan Fliss; Paul L Delamater; David B Richardson; Lawrence S Engel
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 10.753

3.  Propensity score matching for multilevel spatial data: accounting for geographic confounding in health disparity studies.

Authors:  Melanie L Davis; Brian Neelon; Paul J Nietert; Lane F Burgette; Kelly J Hunt; Andrew B Lawson; Leonard E Egede
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 3.918

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.