These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34504033)
1. Applying Propensity Score Methods in Clinical Research in Neurology. Austin PC; Yu AYX; Vyas MV; Kapral MK Neurology; 2021 Nov; 97(18):856-863. PubMed ID: 34504033 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating absolute effects of treatments on survival outcomes: A simulation study. Austin PC; Schuster T Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Oct; 25(5):2214-2237. PubMed ID: 24463885 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bias associated with using the estimated propensity score as a regression covariate. Hade EM; Lu B Stat Med; 2014 Jan; 33(1):74-87. PubMed ID: 23787715 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Austin PC Stat Med; 2013 Jul; 32(16):2837-49. PubMed ID: 23239115 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessing covariate balance when using the generalized propensity score with quantitative or continuous exposures. Austin PC Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 May; 28(5):1365-1377. PubMed ID: 29415624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies. Austin PC Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(20):2137-48. PubMed ID: 20108233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing the performance of the generalized propensity score for estimating the effect of quantitative or continuous exposures on binary outcomes. Austin PC Stat Med; 2018 May; 37(11):1874-1894. PubMed ID: 29508424 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the performance of the generalized propensity score for estimating the effect of quantitative or continuous exposures on survival or time-to-event outcomes. Austin PC Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Aug; 28(8):2348-2367. PubMed ID: 29869566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Propensity score analysis methods with balancing constraints: A Monte Carlo study. Li Y; Li L Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Apr; 30(4):1119-1142. PubMed ID: 33525962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The performance of inverse probability of treatment weighting and full matching on the propensity score in the presence of model misspecification when estimating the effect of treatment on survival outcomes. Austin PC; Stuart EA Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Aug; 26(4):1654-1670. PubMed ID: 25934643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The relative ability of different propensity score methods to balance measured covariates between treated and untreated subjects in observational studies. Austin PC Med Decis Making; 2009; 29(6):661-77. PubMed ID: 19684288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Improving causal inference with a doubly robust estimator that combines propensity score stratification and weighting. Linden A J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Aug; 23(4):697-702. PubMed ID: 28116816 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Vector-based kernel weighting: A simple estimator for improving precision and bias of average treatment effects in multiple treatment settings. Garrido MM; Lum J; Pizer SD Stat Med; 2021 Feb; 40(5):1204-1223. PubMed ID: 33327037 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A novel approach for propensity score matching and stratification for multiple treatments: Application to an electronic health record-derived study. Brown DW; DeSantis SM; Greene TJ; Maroufy V; Yaseen A; Wu H; Williams G; Swartz MD Stat Med; 2020 Jul; 39(17):2308-2323. PubMed ID: 32297677 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Unicompartmental compared with total knee replacement for patients with multimorbidities: a cohort study using propensity score stratification and inverse probability weighting. Prats-Uribe A; Kolovos S; Berencsi K; Carr A; Judge A; Silman A; Arden N; Petersen I; Douglas IJ; Wilkinson JM; Murray D; Valderas JM; Beard DJ; Lamb SE; Ali MS; Pinedo-Villanueva R; Strauss VY; Prieto-Alhambra D Health Technol Assess; 2021 Nov; 25(66):1-126. PubMed ID: 34812138 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Recommendations for the use of propensity score methods in multiple sclerosis research. Simoneau G; Pellegrini F; Debray TP; Rouette J; Muñoz J; Platt RW; Petkau J; Bohn J; Shen C; de Moor C; Karim ME Mult Scler; 2022 Aug; 28(9):1467-1480. PubMed ID: 35387508 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of Propensity Score Methods and Covariate Adjustment: Evaluation in 4 Cardiovascular Studies. Elze MC; Gregson J; Baber U; Williamson E; Sartori S; Mehran R; Nichols M; Stone GW; Pocock SJ J Am Coll Cardiol; 2017 Jan; 69(3):345-357. PubMed ID: 28104076 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Austin PC; Stuart EA Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(28):3661-79. PubMed ID: 26238958 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Performance evaluation of regression splines for propensity score adjustment in post-market safety analysis with multiple treatments. Tian Y; Baro E; Zhang R J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(5):810-821. PubMed ID: 31502924 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]