Using Multiple Control Groups and Matching to Address Unobserved Biases in Comparative Effectiveness Research
- 21 June 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Statistics in Biosciences
- Vol. 3 (1), 63-78
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-011-9035-4
Abstract
Studies of large policy interventions typically do not involve randomization. Adjustments, such as matching, can remove the bias due to observed covariates, but residual confounding remains a concern. In this paper we introduce two analytical strategies to bolster inferences of the effectiveness of policy interventions based on observational data. First, we identify how study groups may differ and then select a second comparison group on this source of difference. Second, we match subjects using a strategy that finely balances the distributions of key categorical covariates and stochastically balances on other covariates. An observational study of the effect of parity on the severely ill subjects enrolled in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program illustrates our methods.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Matching Methods for Causal Inference: A Review and a Look ForwardStatistical Science, 2010
- Testing hypotheses in orderBiometrika, 2008
- The Impact of Parity on Major Depression Treatment Quality in the Federal Employees’ Health Benefits Program After Parity ImplementationMedical Care, 2006
- Will Parity in Coverage Result in Better Mental Health Care?The New England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Asymptotic Separability in Sensitivity AnalysisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 2000
- Dual and simultaneous sensitivity analysis for matched pairsBiometrika, 1998
- A unifying approach for confidence intervals and testing of equivalence and differenceBiometrika, 1996
- Constructing a Control Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the Propensity ScoreThe American Statistician, 1985
- Further Comparative Analyses of Pretest-Posttest Research DesignsThe American Statistician, 1983
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika, 1983