• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用预后评分进行一般治疗方案的因果推断。

The use of prognostic scores for causal inference with general treatment regimes.

机构信息

Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Section of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen K, Denmark.

出版信息

Stat Med. 2019 May 20;38(11):2013-2029. doi: 10.1002/sim.8084. Epub 2019 Jan 16.

DOI:10.1002/sim.8084
PMID:30652333
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6590249/
Abstract

In nonrandomised studies, inferring causal effects requires appropriate methods for addressing confounding bias. Although it is common to adopt propensity score analysis to this purpose, prognostic score analysis has recently been proposed as an alternative strategy. While both approaches were originally introduced to estimate causal effects for binary interventions, the theory of propensity score has since been extended to the case of general treatment regimes. Indeed, many treatments are not assigned in a binary fashion and require a certain extent of dosing. Hence, researchers may often be interested in estimating treatment effects across multiple exposures. To the best of our knowledge, the prognostic score analysis has not been yet generalised to this case. In this article, we describe the theory of prognostic scores for causal inference with general treatment regimes. Our methods can be applied to compare multiple treatments using nonrandomised data, a topic of great relevance in contemporary evaluations of clinical interventions. We propose estimators for the average treatment effects in different populations of interest, the validity of which is assessed through a series of simulations. Finally, we present an illustrative case in which we estimate the effect of the delay to Aspirin administration on a composite outcome of death or dependence at 6 months in stroke patients.

摘要

在非随机研究中,推断因果效应需要采用适当的方法来解决混杂偏差。尽管倾向评分分析常用于此目的,但最近已提出预后评分分析作为替代策略。虽然这两种方法最初都是为了估计二项干预措施的因果效应而提出的,但倾向评分理论后来已经扩展到一般治疗方案的情况。事实上,许多治疗方法并不是以二项式方式分配的,并且需要一定程度的剂量。因此,研究人员通常可能有兴趣在多个暴露中估计治疗效果。据我们所知,预后评分分析尚未推广到这种情况。在本文中,我们描述了用于具有一般治疗方案的因果推断的预后评分理论。我们的方法可应用于使用非随机数据比较多种治疗方法,这是当代临床干预评估中的一个重要主题。我们针对不同感兴趣人群提出了平均治疗效果的估计量,并通过一系列模拟评估了其有效性。最后,我们提出了一个说明性案例,其中我们估计了在中风患者中,阿司匹林给药延迟对 6 个月时死亡或依赖的复合结局的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/f4c77e1565ce/SIM-38-2013-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/bccabdd5788d/SIM-38-2013-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/feff3c14444f/SIM-38-2013-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/f4c77e1565ce/SIM-38-2013-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/bccabdd5788d/SIM-38-2013-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/feff3c14444f/SIM-38-2013-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1fc8/6590249/f4c77e1565ce/SIM-38-2013-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
The use of prognostic scores for causal inference with general treatment regimes.使用预后评分进行一般治疗方案的因果推断。
Stat Med. 2019 May 20;38(11):2013-2029. doi: 10.1002/sim.8084. Epub 2019 Jan 16.
2
Prognostic score-based model averaging approach for propensity score estimation.基于预后评分的模型平均倾向评分估计方法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Oct 3;24(1):228. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02350-y.
3
Prognostic score-based balance measures can be a useful diagnostic for propensity score methods in comparative effectiveness research.基于预后评分的平衡措施可作为比较有效性研究中倾向评分方法的有用诊断工具。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Aug;66(8 Suppl):S84-S90.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.01.013.
4
Combining machine learning and propensity score weighting to estimate causal effects in multivalued treatments.结合机器学习和倾向得分加权来估计多值治疗中的因果效应。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2016 Dec;22(6):871-881. doi: 10.1111/jep.12610. Epub 2016 Jul 15.
5
On the joint use of propensity and prognostic scores in estimation of the average treatment effect on the treated: a simulation study.关于倾向得分和预后得分在估计对治疗对象的平均治疗效果中的联合应用:一项模拟研究。
Stat Med. 2014 Sep 10;33(20):3488-508. doi: 10.1002/sim.6030. Epub 2013 Oct 22.
6
A comparison of parametric propensity score-based methods for causal inference with multiple treatments and a binary outcome.多处理因素和二分类结局下基于参数倾向评分的因果推断方法比较。
Stat Med. 2021 Mar 30;40(7):1653-1677. doi: 10.1002/sim.8862. Epub 2021 Jan 18.
7
Comparing approaches to causal inference for longitudinal data: inverse probability weighting versus propensity scores.纵向数据因果推断方法比较:逆概率加权法与倾向得分法。
Int J Biostat. 2010;6(2):Article 14. doi: 10.2202/1557-4679.1198.
8
Improving causal inference with a doubly robust estimator that combines propensity score stratification and weighting.利用结合倾向评分分层和加权的双重稳健估计器改进因果推断。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Aug;23(4):697-702. doi: 10.1111/jep.12714. Epub 2017 Jan 24.
9
On the aggregation of published prognostic scores for causal inference in observational studies.发表的预后评分在观察性研究中因果推断的聚集。
Stat Med. 2020 May 15;39(10):1440-1457. doi: 10.1002/sim.8489. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
10
Matching algorithms for causal inference with multiple treatments.多处理因果推断的匹配算法。
Stat Med. 2019 Jul 30;38(17):3139-3167. doi: 10.1002/sim.8147. Epub 2019 May 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Research considerations for prospective studies of patients with coma and disorders of consciousness.昏迷和意识障碍患者前瞻性研究的研究考量
Brain Commun. 2024 Jan 29;6(1):fcae022. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcae022. eCollection 2024.
2
Targeted learning in observational studies with multi-valued treatments: An evaluation of antipsychotic drug treatment safety.多值治疗观察性研究中的靶向学习:抗精神病药物治疗安全性评估
Stat Med. 2024 Apr 15;43(8):1489-1508. doi: 10.1002/sim.10003. Epub 2024 Feb 5.
3
Confounder Adjustment Using the Disease Risk Score: A Proposal for Weighting Methods.

本文引用的文献

1
Propensity score analysis with partially observed covariates: How should multiple imputation be used?倾向评分分析与部分观测协变量:应如何使用多重插补?
Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 Jan;28(1):3-19. doi: 10.1177/0962280217713032. Epub 2017 Jun 2.
2
From Trial to Target Populations - Calibrating Real-World Data.从试验到目标人群——校准真实世界数据。
N Engl J Med. 2017 Mar 30;376(13):1203-1205. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1614720.
3
The "Dry-Run" Analysis: A Method for Evaluating Risk Scores for Confounding Control.“预演”分析:一种评估混杂因素控制风险评分的方法。
使用疾病风险评分进行混杂因素调整:加权方法建议
Am J Epidemiol. 2024 Feb 5;193(2):377-388. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwad196.
4
Dealing with confounding in observational studies: A scoping review of methods evaluated in simulation studies with single-point exposure.处理观察性研究中的混杂因素:单点暴露模拟研究中评估方法的范围综述。
Stat Med. 2023 Feb 20;42(4):487-516. doi: 10.1002/sim.9628. Epub 2022 Dec 23.
5
A likely responder approach for the analysis of randomized controlled trials.可能响应者分析方法在随机对照试验中的应用。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2022 Mar;114:106688. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106688. Epub 2022 Jan 24.
6
Practical recommendations on double score matching for estimating causal effects.关于双评分匹配法估计因果效应的实用建议。
Stat Med. 2022 Apr 15;41(8):1421-1445. doi: 10.1002/sim.9289. Epub 2021 Dec 26.
7
On the aggregation of published prognostic scores for causal inference in observational studies.发表的预后评分在观察性研究中因果推断的聚集。
Stat Med. 2020 May 15;39(10):1440-1457. doi: 10.1002/sim.8489. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 May 1;185(9):842-852. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx032.
4
Clinical prediction in defined populations: a simulation study investigating when and how to aggregate existing models.特定人群中的临床预测:一项关于何时以及如何整合现有模型的模拟研究
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Jan 6;17(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0277-1.
5
Dimension reduction and shrinkage methods for high dimensional disease risk scores in historical data.历史数据中高维疾病风险评分的降维和收缩方法。
Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2016 Apr 5;13:5. doi: 10.1186/s12982-016-0047-x. eCollection 2016.
6
Propensity score matching and subclassification in observational studies with multi-level treatments.观察性研究中多水平治疗的倾向评分匹配与亚分类
Biometrics. 2016 Dec;72(4):1055-1065. doi: 10.1111/biom.12505. Epub 2016 Mar 17.
7
Comparison of high-dimensional confounder summary scores in comparative studies of newly marketed medications.新上市药物比较研究中高维混杂因素汇总分数的比较
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Aug;76:200-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.02.011. Epub 2016 Feb 27.
8
Estimating the effect of treatment on binary outcomes using full matching on the propensity score.使用倾向得分完全匹配法估计治疗对二元结局的影响。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2017 Dec;26(6):2505-2525. doi: 10.1177/0962280215601134. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
9
Optimal full matching for survival outcomes: a method that merits more widespread use.生存结局的最优完全匹配:一种值得更广泛应用的方法。
Stat Med. 2015 Dec 30;34(30):3949-67. doi: 10.1002/sim.6602. Epub 2015 Aug 6.
10
Matching on the disease risk score in comparative effectiveness research of new treatments.在新疗法的比较效果研究中对疾病风险评分进行匹配。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015 Sep;24(9):951-61. doi: 10.1002/pds.3810. Epub 2015 Jun 25.