Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Dec;36(12):1993-2003.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-1991-5. Epub 2010 Aug 6.

Propensity scores in intensive care and anaesthesiology literature: a systematic review

Affiliations

Propensity scores in intensive care and anaesthesiology literature: a systematic review

Etienne Gayat et al. Intensive Care Med. 2010 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Propensity score methods have been increasingly used in the last 10 years. However, the practical use of the propensity score (PS) has been reported as heterogeneous in several papers reviewing the use of propensity scores and giving some advice. No precedent work has focused on the specific application of PS in intensive care and anaesthesiology literature.

Objectives: After a brief development of the theory of propensity score, to assess the use and the quality of reporting of PS studies in intensive care and anaesthesiology, and to evaluate how past reviews have influenced the quality of the reporting.

Study design and setting: Forty-seven articles published between 2006 and 2009 in the intensive care and anaesthesiology literature were evaluated. We extracted the characteristics of the report, the type of analysis, the details of matching procedures, the number of patients in treated and control groups, and the number of covariates included in the PS models.

Results: Of the 47 articles reviewed, 26 used matching on PS, 12 used stratification on PS and 9 used adjustment on PS. The method used was reported in 81% of the articles, and the choice to conduct a paired analysis or not was reported in only 15%. The comparison with the previously published reviews showed little improvement in reporting in the last few years.

Conclusion: The quality of reporting propensity scores in intensive care and anaesthesiology literature should be improved. We provide some recommendations to the investigators in order to improve the reporting of PS analyses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Propensity scores in intensive care literature.
    Ferrer R, Suarez D, Artigas A. Ferrer R, et al. Intensive Care Med. 2011 May;37(5):882; author reply 883. doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2190-8. Epub 2011 Feb 25. Intensive Care Med. 2011. PMID: 21350904 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. BMJ. 2003 Aug 9;327(7410):320-1 - PubMed
    1. Anesthesiology. 2008 Jul;109(1):44-53 - PubMed
    1. Acta Oncol. 2002;41(2):131-7 - PubMed
    1. Crit Care. 2008;12(4):R101 - PubMed
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008 Jul 1;178(1):20-5 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources