TY - JOUR
T1 - Propensity Score Weighting and Trimming Strategies for Reducing Variance and Bias of Treatment Effect Estimates
T2 - A Simulation Study
AU - Stürmer, Til
AU - Webster-Clark, Michael
AU - Lund, Jennifer L
AU - Wyss, Richard
AU - Ellis, Alan R
AU - Lunt, Mark
AU - Rothman, Kenneth J
AU - Glynn, Robert J.
N1 - © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].
PY - 2021/8/1
Y1 - 2021/8/1
N2 - To extend previous simulations on the performance of propensity score (PS) weighting and trimming methods to settings without and with unmeasured confounding, Poisson outcomes, and various strengths of treatment prediction (PS c statistic), we simulated studies with a binary intended treatment T as a function of 4 measured covariates. We mimicked treatment withheld and last-resort treatment by adding 2 "unmeasured" dichotomous factors that directed treatment to change for some patients in both tails of the PS distribution. The number of outcomes Y was simulated as a Poisson function of T and confounders. We estimated the PS as a function of measured covariates and trimmed the tails of the PS distribution using 3 strategies ("Crump," "Stürmer," and "Walker"). After trimming and reestimation, we used alternative PS weights to estimate the treatment effect (rate ratio): inverse probability of treatment weighting, standardized mortality ratio (SMR)-treated, SMR-untreated, the average treatment effect in the overlap population (ATO), matching, and entropy. With no unmeasured confounding, the ATO (123%) and "Crump" trimming (112%) improved relative efficiency compared with untrimmed inverse probability of treatment weighting. With unmeasured confounding, untrimmed estimates were biased irrespective of weighting method, and only Stürmer and Walker trimming consistently reduced bias. In settings where unmeasured confounding (e.g., frailty) may lead physicians to withhold treatment, Stürmer and Walker trimming should be considered before primary analysis.
AB - To extend previous simulations on the performance of propensity score (PS) weighting and trimming methods to settings without and with unmeasured confounding, Poisson outcomes, and various strengths of treatment prediction (PS c statistic), we simulated studies with a binary intended treatment T as a function of 4 measured covariates. We mimicked treatment withheld and last-resort treatment by adding 2 "unmeasured" dichotomous factors that directed treatment to change for some patients in both tails of the PS distribution. The number of outcomes Y was simulated as a Poisson function of T and confounders. We estimated the PS as a function of measured covariates and trimmed the tails of the PS distribution using 3 strategies ("Crump," "Stürmer," and "Walker"). After trimming and reestimation, we used alternative PS weights to estimate the treatment effect (rate ratio): inverse probability of treatment weighting, standardized mortality ratio (SMR)-treated, SMR-untreated, the average treatment effect in the overlap population (ATO), matching, and entropy. With no unmeasured confounding, the ATO (123%) and "Crump" trimming (112%) improved relative efficiency compared with untrimmed inverse probability of treatment weighting. With unmeasured confounding, untrimmed estimates were biased irrespective of weighting method, and only Stürmer and Walker trimming consistently reduced bias. In settings where unmeasured confounding (e.g., frailty) may lead physicians to withhold treatment, Stürmer and Walker trimming should be considered before primary analysis.
KW - bias (epidemiology)
KW - epidemiologic methods
KW - propensity score
KW - simulation study
KW - trimming
KW - unmeasured confounding
KW - variance
KW - weighting
U2 - 10.1093/aje/kwab041
DO - 10.1093/aje/kwab041
M3 - Article
C2 - 33615349
SN - 0002-9262
VL - 190
SP - 1659
EP - 1670
JO - American Journal of Epidemiology
JF - American Journal of Epidemiology
IS - 8
ER -