Suppr超能文献

使用工具变量法比较两种治疗方法时的选择偏倚,但有两种以上治疗方法可供选择。

Selection Bias When Using Instrumental Variable Methods to Compare Two Treatments But More Than Two Treatments Are Available.

作者信息

Ertefaie Ashkan, Small Dylan, Flory James, Hennessy Sean

出版信息

Int J Biostat. 2016 May 1;12(1):219-32. doi: 10.1515/ijb-2015-0006.

Abstract

Instrumental variable (IV) methods are widely used to adjust for the bias in estimating treatment effects caused by unmeasured confounders in observational studies. It is common that a comparison between two treatments is focused on and that only subjects receiving one of these two treatments are considered in the analysis even though more than two treatments are available. In this paper, we provide empirical and theoretical evidence that the IV methods may result in biased treatment effects if applied on a data set in which subjects are preselected based on their received treatments. We frame this as a selection bias problem and propose a procedure that identifies the treatment effect of interest as a function of a vector of sensitivity parameters. We also list assumptions under which analyzing the preselected data does not lead to a biased treatment effect estimate. The performance of the proposed method is examined using simulation studies. We applied our method on The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database to estimate the comparative effect of metformin and sulfonylureas on weight gain among diabetic patients.

摘要

工具变量(IV)方法被广泛用于调整观察性研究中因未测量的混杂因素而导致的治疗效果估计偏差。通常情况下,即使有两种以上的治疗方法可供选择,对两种治疗方法的比较仍是重点,并且在分析中仅考虑接受这两种治疗方法之一的受试者。在本文中,我们提供了实证和理论证据,表明如果将IV方法应用于基于受试者接受的治疗进行预先选择的数据集,可能会导致治疗效果出现偏差。我们将此视为选择偏差问题,并提出了一种程序,该程序将感兴趣的治疗效果识别为灵敏度参数向量的函数。我们还列出了在哪些假设下分析预先选择的数据不会导致有偏差的治疗效果估计。通过模拟研究检验了所提出方法的性能。我们将我们的方法应用于健康改善网络(THIN)数据库,以估计二甲双胍和磺脲类药物对糖尿病患者体重增加的比较效果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验