skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

Multinomial Extension of Propensity Score Trimming Methods: A Simulation Study

American journal of epidemiology, 2019-03, Vol.188 (3), p.609-616 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

The Author(s) 2019. 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. 2019 ;The Author(s) 2019. 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. ;ISSN: 0002-9262 ;EISSN: 1476-6256 ;DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy263 ;PMID: 30517602

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Multinomial Extension of Propensity Score Trimming Methods: A Simulation Study
  • Author: Yoshida, Kazuki ; Solomon, Daniel H ; Haneuse, Sebastien ; Kim, Seoyoung C ; Patorno, Elisabetta ; Tedeschi, Sara K ; Lyu, Houchen ; Franklin, Jessica M ; Stürmer, Til ; Hernández-Díaz, Sonia ; Glynn, Robert J
  • Subjects: Bias ; Computer Simulation ; Humans ; Matching ; Models, Statistical ; Practice of Epidemiology ; Probabilistic methods ; Propensity Score ; Reduction ; Research Design ; Simulation ; Trimming ; Weighting methods
  • Is Part Of: American journal of epidemiology, 2019-03, Vol.188 (3), p.609-616
  • Description: Abstract Crump et al. (Biometrika. 2009;96(1):187–199), Stürmer et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(7):843–854), and Walker et al. (Comp Eff Res. 2013;2013(3):11–20) proposed propensity score (PS) trimming methods as a means to improve efficiency (Crump) or reduce confounding (Stürmer and Walker). We generalized the trimming definitions by considering multinomial PSs, one for each treatment, and proved that these proposed definitions reduce to the original binary definitions when we have only 2 treatment groups. We then examined the performance of the proposed multinomial trimming methods in the setting of 3 treatment groups, in which subjects with extreme PSs more likely had unmeasured confounders. Inverse probability of treatment weights, matching weights, and overlap weights were used to control for measured confounders. All 3 methods reduced bias regardless of the weighting methods in most scenarios. Multinomial Stürmer and Walker trimming were more successful in bias reduction when the 3 treatment groups had very different sizes (10:10:80). Variance reduction, seen in all methods with inverse probability of treatment weights but not with matching weights or overlap weights, was more successful with multinomial Crump and Stürmer trimming. In conclusion, our proposed definitions of multinomial PS trimming methods were beneficial within our simulation settings that focused on the influence of unmeasured confounders.
  • Publisher: United States: Oxford University Press
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 0002-9262
    EISSN: 1476-6256
    DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy263
    PMID: 30517602
  • Source: GFMER Free Medical Journals
    MEDLINE
    Alma/SFX Local Collection
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait