The role of the c‐statistic in variable selection for propensity score models
- 9 December 2010
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Wiley in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
- Vol. 20 (3), 317-320
- https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.2074
Abstract
The applied literature on propensity scores has often cited the c‐statistic as a measure of the ability of the propensity score to control confounding. However, a high c‐statistic in the propensity model is neither necessary nor sufficient for control of confounding. Moreover, use of the c‐statistic as a guide in constructing propensity scores may result in less overlap in propensity scores between treated and untreated subjects; this may require the analyst to restrict populations for inference. Such restrictions may reduce precision of estimates and change the population to which the estimate applies. Variable selection based on prior subject matter knowledge, empirical observation, and sensitivity analysis is preferable and avoids many of these problems. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Propensity score estimation: neural networks, support vector machines, decision trees (CART), and meta-classifiers as alternatives to logistic regressionJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2010
- The added risk of opioid problem use among treatment-seeking youth with marijuana and/or alcohol problem useAddiction, 2010
- Improving propensity score weighting using machine learningStatistics in Medicine, 2010
- Invited Commentary: Positivity in PracticeAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Illustrating bias due to conditioning on a colliderInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 2009
- Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity‐score matched samplesStatistics in Medicine, 2009
- Constructing Inverse Probability Weights for Marginal Structural ModelsAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2008
- A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methodsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2006
- Variable Selection for Propensity Score ModelsAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2006
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika, 1983