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
Comparative Study
. 2014 Oct;49(5):1701-20.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12182. Epub 2014 Apr 30.

Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores

Melissa M Garrido  1 , Amy S Kelley, Julia Paris, Katherine Roza, Diane E Meier, R Sean Morrison, Melissa D Aldridge
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores

Melissa M Garrido et al. Health Serv Res. 2014 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: To model the steps involved in preparing for and carrying out propensity score analyses by providing step-by-step guidance and Stata code applied to an empirical dataset.

Study design: Guidance, Stata code, and empirical examples are given to illustrate (1) the process of choosing variables to include in the propensity score; (2) balance of propensity score across treatment and comparison groups; (3) balance of covariates across treatment and comparison groups within blocks of the propensity score; (4) choice of matching and weighting strategies; (5) balance of covariates after matching or weighting the sample; and (6) interpretation of treatment effect estimates.

Empirical application: We use data from the Palliative Care for Cancer Patients (PC4C) study, a multisite observational study of the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient health outcomes and health services use, to illustrate the development and use of a propensity score.

Conclusions: Propensity scores are one useful tool for accounting for observed differences between treated and comparison groups. Careful testing of propensity scores is required before using them to estimate treatment effects.

Keywords: Observational data/quasi-experiments; administrative data uses; patient outcomes/function.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of Propensity Score across Treatment and Comparison Groups
Figure 2
Figure 2
Example of Density Plots of Mean Physical Symptom Severity at Baseline before and after Kernel Matching on Empirical Dataset
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Abadie A. Imbens G. On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators. Econometrica. 2008;76(6):1537–58.
    1. Abadie A. Imbens G. 2012. “Matching on the Estimated Propensity Score.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 15301 [accessed on November 8, 2013]. Available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15301.
    1. Austin PC. Balance Diagnostics for Comparing the Distribution of Baseline Covariates between Treatment Groups in Propensity-Score Matched Samples. Statistics in Medicine. 2009a;28:3083–107. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Austin PC. The Relative Ability of Different Propensity Score Methods to Balance Measured Covariates between Treated and Untreated Subjects in Observational Studies. Medical Decision Making. 2009b;29:661–77. - PubMed
    1. Austin PC. Type I Error Rates, Coverage of Confidence Intervals, and Variance Estimation in Propensity-Score Matched Analyses. International Journal of Biostatistics. 2009c;5(1):13. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources