332 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26050059)
1. A new weighted balance measure helped to select the variables to be included in a propensity score model.
Caruana E; Chevret S; Resche-Rigon M; Pirracchio R
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 68(12):1415-22.e2. PubMed ID: 26050059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Propensity score balance measures in pharmacoepidemiology: a simulation study.
Ali MS; Groenwold RH; Pestman WR; Belitser SV; Roes KC; Hoes AW; de Boer A; Klungel OH
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2014 Aug; 23(8):802-11. PubMed ID: 24478163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Metrics for covariate balance in cohort studies of causal effects.
Franklin JM; Rassen JA; Ackermann D; Bartels DB; Schneeweiss S
Stat Med; 2014 May; 33(10):1685-99. PubMed ID: 24323618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measuring balance and model selection in propensity score methods.
Belitser SV; Martens EP; Pestman WR; Groenwold RH; de Boer A; Klungel OH
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2011 Nov; 20(11):1115-29. PubMed ID: 21805529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using classification tree analysis to generate propensity score weights.
Linden A; Yarnold PR
J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Aug; 23(4):703-712. PubMed ID: 28371206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.
Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Anderson GM
Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):734-53. PubMed ID: 16708349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Genetic matching for time-dependent treatments: a longitudinal extension and simulation study.
Weymann D; Chan B; Regier DA
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Aug; 23(1):181. PubMed ID: 37559105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Propensity score estimators for the average treatment effect and the average treatment effect on the treated may yield very different estimates.
Pirracchio R; Carone M; Rigon MR; Caruana E; Mebazaa A; Chevret S
Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Oct; 25(5):1938-1954. PubMed ID: 24201469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of the ability of double-robust estimators to correct bias in propensity score matching analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation study.
Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Devereaux PJ; Daurès JP; Landais P; Le Manach Y
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2017 Dec; 26(12):1513-1519. PubMed ID: 28984050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Goodness-of-fit diagnostics for the propensity score model when estimating treatment effects using covariate adjustment with the propensity score.
Austin PC
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2008 Dec; 17(12):1202-17. PubMed ID: 18972454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of balancing scores using the ANCOVA approach for estimating average treatment effect: a simulation study.
Tu C; Koh WY
J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(3):508-515. PubMed ID: 30561245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How Do Propensity Score Methods Measure Up in the Presence of Measurement Error? A Monte Carlo Study.
Rodríguez De Gil P; Bellara AP; Lanehart RE; Lee RS; Kim ES; Kromrey JD
Multivariate Behav Res; 2015; 50(5):520-32. PubMed ID: 26610250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Comparison of Latent Variable Propensity Score Models to Traditional Propensity Score Models under Conditions of Covariate Unreliability.
Whittaker TA
Multivariate Behav Res; 2020; 55(4):625-646. PubMed ID: 31530179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks.
Austin PC
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Jun; 61(6):537-45. PubMed ID: 18471657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Double-adjustment in propensity score matching analysis: choosing a threshold for considering residual imbalance.
Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Daurès JP; Devereaux PJ; Landais P; Le Manach Y
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Apr; 17(1):78. PubMed ID: 28454568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The z-difference can be used to measure covariate balance in matched propensity score analyses.
Kuss O
J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Nov; 66(11):1302-7. PubMed ID: 23972521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Balance measures for propensity score methods: a clinical example on beta-agonist use and the risk of myocardial infarction.
Groenwold RH; de Vries F; de Boer A; Pestman WR; Rutten FH; Hoes AW; Klungel OH
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2011 Nov; 20(11):1130-7. PubMed ID: 21953948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Estimating the effect of treatment on binary outcomes using full matching on the propensity score.
Austin PC; Stuart EA
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Dec; 26(6):2505-2525. PubMed ID: 26329750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Estimating causal effects for survival (time-to-event) outcomes by combining classification tree analysis and propensity score weighting.
Linden A; Yarnold PR
J Eval Clin Pract; 2018 Apr; 24(2):380-387. PubMed ID: 29230910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prognostic score-based balance measures can be a useful diagnostic for propensity score methods in comparative effectiveness research.
Stuart EA; Lee BK; Leacy FP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Aug; 66(8 Suppl):S84-S90.e1. PubMed ID: 23849158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
