Instrumental variables: The power of wishful thinking vs the confounded reality of comparative effectiveness research.
作者信息
Soumerai Stephen B, Koppel Ross
机构信息
Harvard Medical School Department of Population Medicine and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Boston, Massachusetts.
Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
出版信息
Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun;54(3):537-542. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13129. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Instrumental variables: The power of wishful thinking vs the confounded reality of comparative effectiveness research.工具变量：一厢情愿的力量与比较效果研究中混杂的现实情况
Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun;54(3):537-542. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13129. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
2
Falsification Testing of Instrumental Variables Methods for Comparative Effectiveness Research.比较效果研究中工具变量方法的证伪检验
Health Serv Res. 2016 Apr;51(2):790-811. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12355. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
3
Surrogate endpoints: wishful thinking or reality?替代终点：一厢情愿还是现实？
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Apr 19;98(8):502-3. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj153.
4
Causal Inference in Oncology Comparative Effectiveness Research Using Observational Data: Are Instrumental Variables Underutilized?利用观察性数据进行肿瘤学比较效果研究中的因果推断：工具变量是否未得到充分利用？
J Clin Oncol. 2023 May 1;41(13):2319-2322. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.02853. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
5
The Reliability of Instrumental Variables in Health Care Effectiveness Research: Less Is More.医疗保健效果研究中工具变量的可靠性：少即是多。
Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb;52(1):9-15. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12527. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
6
Wishful thinking in preschoolers.学龄前儿童的一厢情愿思维。
J Exp Child Psychol. 2016 Jan;141:267-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.07.018. Epub 2015 Aug 17.
7
A new method to isolate local-area practice styles in prescription use as the basis for instrumental variables in comparative effectiveness research.一种新的方法来分离处方使用中的局部实践模式，作为比较有效性研究中工具变量的基础。
Med Care. 2010 Aug;48(8):710-7. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e41bb2.
8
Performing both propensity score and instrumental variable analyses in observational studies often leads to discrepant results: a systematic review.在观察性研究中同时进行倾向评分分析和工具变量分析常常导致结果不一致：一项系统评价。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Oct;68(10):1232-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.04.003. Epub 2015 Apr 8.
9
Instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research: the paired availability design.观察性比较效果研究的工具变量分析：配对可及性设计
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Dec 2;161(11):840-1. doi: 10.7326/L14-5029.
10
Instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research: the paired availability design.观察性比较效果研究的工具变量分析：配对可及性设计
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Dec 2;161(11):841. doi: 10.7326/L14-5029-2.
本文引用的文献
1
Instrumental variables: Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.工具变量：勿因噎废食。
Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun;54(3):543-546. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13130. Epub 2019 Mar 11.
2
2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).2017年欧洲心脏病学会（ESC）ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死患者管理指南：欧洲心脏病学会（ESC）ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死患者管理工作组
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jan 7;39(2):119-177. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx393.
3
False Dichotomies and Health Policy Research Designs: Randomized Trials Are Not Always the Answer.错误的二分法与卫生政策研究设计：随机试验并非总是答案。
J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Feb;32(2):204-209. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3841-9. Epub 2016 Oct 18.
4
The Reliability of Instrumental Variables in Health Care Effectiveness Research: Less Is More.医疗保健效果研究中工具变量的可靠性：少即是多。
Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb;52(1):9-15. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12527. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
5
Follow Your Heart: Survival Chances and Costs after Heart Attacks-An Instrumental Variable Approach.随心而为：心脏病发作后的生存几率与成本——一种工具变量法
Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb;52(1):16-34. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12509. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
6
Outcomes of Basic Versus Advanced Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Medical Emergencies.院外医疗急救中基础生命支持与高级生命支持的效果
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Jul 5;165(1):68-9. doi: 10.7326/L15-0627.
7
History Bias, Study Design, and the Unfulfilled Promise of Pay-for-Performance Policies in Health Care.历史偏差、研究设计与医疗保健中绩效薪酬政策未兑现的承诺。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2016 Jun 23;13:E82. doi: 10.5888/pcd13.160133.
8
Outcomes of Basic Versus Advanced Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Medical Emergencies.院外医疗急救中基础生命支持与高级生命支持的效果
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Nov 3;163(9):681-90. doi: 10.7326/M15-0557. Epub 2015 Oct 13.
9
How Do You Know Which Health Care Effectiveness Research You Can Trust? A Guide to Study Design for the Perplexed.如何知道哪些医疗保健有效性研究值得信赖？给困惑者的研究设计指南。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2015 Jun 25;12:E101. doi: 10.5888/pcd12.150187.
10
Potential bias of instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research.工具变量分析在观察性比较有效性研究中的潜在偏倚。
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Jul 15;161(2):131-8. doi: 10.7326/M13-1887.
Zotero 插件