Litcius/Paper detail

Propensity score matching versus coarsened exact matching in observational comparative effectiveness research

David Guy, Igor Karp, Piotr Wilk, Joseph L. Chin, George Rodrigues

2021Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research26 citationsDOI

Abstract

Aim & methods: We compared propensity score matching (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) in balancing baseline characteristics between treatment groups using observational data obtained from a pan-Canadian prostate cancer radiotherapy database. Changes in effect estimates were evaluated as a function of improvements in balance, using results from randomized clinical trials to guide interpretation. Results: CEM and PSM improved balance between groups in both comparisons, while retaining the majority of original data. Improvements in balance were associated with effect estimates closer to those obtained in randomized clinical trials. Conclusion: CEM and PSM led to substantial improvements in balance between comparison groups, while retaining a considerable proportion of original data. This could lead to improved accuracy in effect estimates obtained using observational data in a variety of clinical situations.

Topics & Concepts

Propensity score matchingObservational studyMedicineRandomized controlled trialMatching (statistics)Comparative effectiveness researchClinical trialBalance (ability)StatisticsPhysical therapyInternal medicineMathematicsAlternative medicinePathologyAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeStatistical Methods and Inference