• 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

预后模型与倾向评分

Prognostic models and the propensity score.

作者信息

Drake C, Fisher L

机构信息

Division of Statistics, University of California, Davis 95616, USA.

出版信息

Int J Epidemiol. 1995 Feb;24(1):183-7. doi: 10.1093/ije/24.1.183.

DOI:10.1093/ije/24.1.183
PMID:7797341
Abstract

Subjects in observational studies of exposure effects have not been randomized to exposure groups and may therefore differ systematically with regard to variables related to exposure and/or outcome. To obtain unbiased estimates and tests of exposure effects one needs to adjust for these variables. A common method is adjustment via a parametric model incorporating all known prognostic variables. Rosenbaum and Rubin propose adjustment by the conditional exposure probability given a set of covariates which they call the propensity score. They show that, at any value of the propensity score, covariates are on average balanced between exposure groups. Thus matching on the propensity score leads to unbiased estimators and tests of exposure effect. However, the validity of the method depends on knowing the exposure probability. This quantity is usually not known in observational studies and needs to be estimated.

摘要

暴露效应观察性研究中的受试者并未被随机分配到暴露组,因此在与暴露和/或结果相关的变量方面可能存在系统性差异。为了获得无偏的暴露效应估计值和检验结果,需要对这些变量进行调整。一种常用的方法是通过纳入所有已知预后变量的参数模型进行调整。罗森鲍姆和鲁宾提出根据一组协变量的条件暴露概率进行调整,他们将其称为倾向得分。他们表明,在倾向得分的任何值上,协变量在暴露组之间平均是平衡的。因此,根据倾向得分进行匹配可得到无偏的暴露效应估计值和检验结果。然而,该方法的有效性取决于是否知道暴露概率。在观察性研究中,这个量通常是未知的,需要进行估计。

相似文献

1
Prognostic models and the propensity score.预后模型与倾向评分
Int J Epidemiol. 1995 Feb;24(1):183-7. doi: 10.1093/ije/24.1.183.
2
Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.倾向得分法在治疗组与非随机对照组比较中减少偏倚的应用
Stat Med. 1998 Oct 15;17(19):2265-81. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::aid-sim918>3.0.co;2-b.
3
Comparison of the ability of double-robust estimators to correct bias in propensity score matching analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation study.双重稳健估计在倾向评分匹配分析中校正偏差的能力比较。一项蒙特卡罗模拟研究。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017 Dec;26(12):1513-1519. doi: 10.1002/pds.4325. Epub 2017 Oct 6.
4
An evaluation of bias in propensity score-adjusted non-linear regression models.倾向得分调整后的非线性回归模型中的偏倚评估。
Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Mar;27(3):846-862. doi: 10.1177/0962280216643739. Epub 2016 Apr 19.
5
A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.不同倾向得分模型平衡治疗组和未治疗组受试者间测量变量能力的比较:一项蒙特卡洛研究
Stat Med. 2007 Feb 20;26(4):734-53. doi: 10.1002/sim.2580.
6
Systematic differences in treatment effect estimates between propensity score methods and logistic regression.倾向得分法与逻辑回归在治疗效果估计上的系统差异。
Int J Epidemiol. 2008 Oct;37(5):1142-7. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyn079. Epub 2008 May 3.
7
Estimating exposure effects by modelling the expectation of exposure conditional on confounders.通过对混杂因素条件下的暴露期望进行建模来估计暴露效应。
Biometrics. 1992 Jun;48(2):479-95.
8
[Unbiased estimation of factorial effect by using analysis of covariance or propensity score method for observational studies in laboratory medicine].[在检验医学观察性研究中使用协方差分析或倾向得分法对析因效应进行无偏估计]
Rinsho Byori. 2012 Jul;60(7):689-97.
9
Introduction to propensity scores.倾向评分简介。
Respirology. 2014 Jul;19(5):625-35. doi: 10.1111/resp.12312. Epub 2014 May 29.
10
Performance of disease risk scores, propensity scores, and traditional multivariable outcome regression in the presence of multiple confounders.存在多种混杂因素时,疾病风险评分、倾向评分和传统多变量结局回归的表现。
Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Sep 1;174(5):613-20. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr143. Epub 2011 Jul 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Short-term outcomes after open versus robot-assisted repair of ventral hernias: a nationwide database study.开放手术与机器人辅助修复腹疝的短期结果:全国数据库研究。
Hernia. 2024 Feb;28(1):233-240. doi: 10.1007/s10029-023-02923-8. Epub 2023 Nov 30.
2
The Risk of Recurrence after Initial Treatment with Vancomycin or Fidaxomicin Utilizing Cerner Health Facts.使用Cerner健康事实数据评估万古霉素或非达霉素初始治疗后的复发风险
Antibiotics (Basel). 2022 Feb 23;11(3):295. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics11030295.
3
Pre-Existing Diabetes Limits Survival Rate After Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Treatment for Advanced Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Study in Japan.
既往糖尿病限制晚期肺癌免疫检查点抑制剂治疗后的生存率:日本的一项回顾性研究
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2021 Feb 22;14:773-781. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S289446. eCollection 2021.
4
Lactic acidosis incidence with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: A retrospective nested case-control study.二甲双胍在 2 型糖尿病合并慢性肾脏病患者中的乳酸酸中毒发生率:一项回顾性巢式病例对照研究。
Endocrinol Diabetes Metab. 2020 Jul 17;4(1):e00170. doi: 10.1002/edm2.170. eCollection 2021 Jan.
5
Identifying independent risk factors for graft loss after primary liver transplantation.确定初次肝移植后移植物丢失的独立危险因素。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017 Aug;402(5):757-766. doi: 10.1007/s00423-017-1594-5. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
6
Type of incision does not predict abdominal wall outcome after emergency surgery for colonic anastomotic leakage.切口类型不能预测结肠吻合口漏急诊手术后的腹壁结局。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 Jun;32(6):865-873. doi: 10.1007/s00384-017-2810-z. Epub 2017 Apr 8.
7
Surgical Outcomes for the Ruptured Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Multicenter Analysis with a Case-Controlled Study.破裂肝细胞癌的手术结局:一项病例对照研究的多中心分析
J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Dec;20(12):2021-2034. doi: 10.1007/s11605-016-3280-2. Epub 2016 Oct 7.
8
Impact of Adjuvant Chemotherapy on Breast Cancer Survival: A Real-World Population.辅助化疗对乳腺癌生存的影响:一项真实世界人群研究。
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 27;10(7):e0132853. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132853. eCollection 2015.
9
Evaluation of the effect of a comprehensive multidisciplinary care pathway for hip fractures: design of a controlled study.评估髋部骨折综合多学科护理路径的效果:对照研究设计。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Oct 12;14:291. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-291.
10
Health care costs in the last week of life: associations with end-of-life conversations.生命最后一周的医疗费用:与临终谈话的关联
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Mar 9;169(5):480-8. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2008.587.