• 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

倾向得分分析再探讨。

Propensity score analysis revisited.

作者信息

Hashimoto Yohei, Yasunaga Hideo

机构信息

Save Sight Institute, The Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Ann Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Mar 14;7(3):99-104. doi: 10.37737/ace.25012. eCollection 2025 Jul 1.

DOI:10.37737/ace.25012
PMID:40697798
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12279407/
Abstract

Propensity score (PS) is the probability of the exposure being assigned, conditional on the observed baseline covariates. Many observational studies have used PS analyses to investigate the effects of exposure on outcomes. This report reviews the five steps of PS analyses: 1) calculating PS; 2) checking the overlap of PS; 3) implementing a matching or weighting method including PS matching, inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, standardized mortality ratio weighting, matching weighting, and overlap weighting; 4) diagnosing the covariate balance; and 5) comparing the outcomes. Two groups are often compared in PS analyses; however, three-group comparisons can provide clinicians with more benefits in many situations in routine clinical practice. Thus, we describe not only two-group comparisons but also three-group comparisons by introducing a few studies that used generalized PS to compare three groups.

摘要

倾向评分(PS)是在观察到的基线协变量条件下暴露被分配的概率。许多观察性研究已使用PS分析来研究暴露对结局的影响。本报告回顾了PS分析的五个步骤:1)计算PS;2)检查PS的重叠性;3)实施匹配或加权方法,包括PS匹配、治疗逆概率加权、标准化死亡率比加权、匹配加权和重叠加权;4)诊断协变量平衡;5)比较结局。PS分析中通常比较两组;然而,在常规临床实践中的许多情况下,三组比较可为临床医生提供更多益处。因此,我们不仅描述两组比较,还通过介绍一些使用广义PS比较三组的研究来描述三组比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/a7319dd1f13b/ace25012f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/151f0b9fe3f6/ace25012f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/46754b2da4b7/ace25012f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/a7319dd1f13b/ace25012f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/151f0b9fe3f6/ace25012f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/46754b2da4b7/ace25012f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/058b/12279407/a7319dd1f13b/ace25012f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Propensity score analysis revisited.倾向得分分析再探讨。
Ann Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Mar 14;7(3):99-104. doi: 10.37737/ace.25012. eCollection 2025 Jul 1.
2
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
3
Comparison of two propensity score-based methods for balancing covariates: the overlap weighting and fine stratification methods in real-world claims data.两种基于倾向评分匹配方法的比较:真实世界理赔数据中的重叠加权法和精细分层法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Jun 3;24(1):122. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02228-z.
4
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
5
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 9;1(1):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub3.
6
On variance estimation of the inverse probability-of-treatment weighting estimator: A tutorial for different types of propensity score weights.逆处理概率加权估计量的方差估计:不同类型倾向评分权重的教程。
Stat Med. 2024 Jun 15;43(13):2672-2694. doi: 10.1002/sim.10078. Epub 2024 Apr 15.
7
Balancing versus modelling in weighted analysis of non-randomised studies with survival outcomes: A simulation study.加权分析非随机生存结局研究中平衡与建模:一项模拟研究。
Stat Med. 2024 Jul 30;43(17):3140-3163. doi: 10.1002/sim.10110. Epub 2024 May 27.
8
Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies.在观察性研究中,利用倾向得分采用治疗权重的逆概率(IPTW)估计因果治疗效果时,朝着最佳实践迈进。
Stat Med. 2015 Dec 10;34(28):3661-79. doi: 10.1002/sim.6607. Epub 2015 Aug 3.
9
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
10
Cost-effectiveness of using prognostic information to select women with breast cancer for adjuvant systemic therapy.利用预后信息为乳腺癌患者选择辅助性全身治疗的成本效益
Health Technol Assess. 2006 Sep;10(34):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-204. doi: 10.3310/hta10340.

引用本文的文献

1
Sodium Polystyrene Sulfonate and Heart Failure Risk: A Comparative Study With Calcium Polystyrene Sulfonate.聚苯乙烯磺酸钠与心力衰竭风险:与聚苯乙烯磺酸钙的比较研究
Nephrology (Carlton). 2025 Sep;30(9):e70117. doi: 10.1111/nep.70117.
2
Association of Combined Enzymatic and Surgical Debridement with Clinical Outcomes in Extensive Burn Patients.广泛烧伤患者联合酶促清创与手术清创与临床结局的关联
J Clin Med. 2025 Jul 24;14(15):5233. doi: 10.3390/jcm14155233.

本文引用的文献

1
Outcomes after hip fracture surgery in patients receiving non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs alone, acetaminophen alone, or both.单独使用非甾体抗炎药、单独使用对乙酰氨基酚或两者联合使用的髋部骨折手术后的结果。
Bone Joint J. 2024 Aug 1;106-B(8):849-857. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.106B8.BJJ-2024-0183.R1.
2
Theory and practice of propensity score analysis.倾向得分分析的理论与实践
Ann Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Oct 3;4(4):101-109. doi: 10.37737/ace.22013. eCollection 2022.
3
Differences in target estimands between different propensity score-based weights.
基于倾向评分的不同权重之间目标估计值的差异。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2023 Oct;32(10):1103-1112. doi: 10.1002/pds.5639. Epub 2023 Jun 5.
4
Outcomes After Endoscopic Evacuation Versus Evacuation Using Craniotomy or Stereotactic Aspiration for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Analysis Using a Japanese Nationwide Database.内镜清除术与开颅术或立体定向抽吸术治疗自发性脑出血的结局比较:利用日本全国数据库进行的分析。
Neurocrit Care. 2023 Jun;38(3):667-675. doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01634-9. Epub 2022 Nov 8.
5
RE:"ADDRESSING EXTREME PROPENSITY SCORES VIA THE OVERLAP WEIGHTS".关于“通过重叠权重处理极端倾向得分”
Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jan 4;190(1):189-190. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa229.
6
Assessment of Outcomes of Treatment With Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Comparative Effectiveness Analysis.评估伴有多种慢性疾病的心房颤动患者口服抗凝治疗的结局:一项比较有效性分析。
JAMA Netw Open. 2018 Sep 7;1(5):e182870. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.2870.
7
Matching Weights to Simultaneously Compare Three Treatment Groups: Comparison to Three-way Matching.匹配权重以同时比较三个治疗组:与三重匹配的比较。
Epidemiology. 2017 May;28(3):387-395. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000627.
8
Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies.在观察性研究中,利用倾向得分采用治疗权重的逆概率(IPTW)估计因果治疗效果时,朝着最佳实践迈进。
Stat Med. 2015 Dec 10;34(28):3661-79. doi: 10.1002/sim.6607. Epub 2015 Aug 3.
9
The use of bootstrapping when using propensity-score matching without replacement: a simulation study.在无放回倾向得分匹配时使用自助法:一项模拟研究。
Stat Med. 2014 Oct 30;33(24):4306-19. doi: 10.1002/sim.6276. Epub 2014 Aug 4.
10
A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score.匹配倾向评分的 12 种算法比较。
Stat Med. 2014 Mar 15;33(6):1057-69. doi: 10.1002/sim.6004. Epub 2013 Oct 7.