Abstract
In individually randomised controlled trials, adjustment for baseline characteristics is often undertaken to increase precision of the treatment effect estimate. This is usually performed using covariate adjustment in outcome regression models. An alternative method of adjustment is to use inverse probability-of-treatment weighting (IPTW), on the basis of estimated propensity scores. We calculate the large-sample marginal variance of IPTW estimators of the mean difference for continuous outcomes, and risk difference, risk ratio or odds ratio for binary outcomes. We show that IPTW adjustment always increases the precision of the treatment effect estimate. For continuous outcomes, we demonstrate that the IPTW estimator has the same large-sample marginal variance as the standard analysis of covariance estimator. However, ignoring the estimation of the propensity score in the calculation of the variance leads to the erroneous conclusion that the IPTW treatment effect estimator has the same variance as an unadjusted estimator; thus, it is important to use a variance estimator that correctly takes into account the estimation of the propensity score. The IPTW approach has particular advantages when estimating risk differences or risk ratios. In this case, non-convergence of covariate-adjusted outcome regression models frequently occurs. Such problems can be circumvented by using the IPTW adjustment approach.
Keywords
baseline adjustment
variance estimation
MeSH Terms
Bursitis/therapy
Computer Simulation
Humans
Odds Ratio
Physical Therapy Modalities/standards
Propensity Score
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods
Treatment Outcome
Authors & Affiliations
3 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Williamson Elizabeth J
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Forbes Andrew
White Ian R
References (22)
22 references, click to expand
-
Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores.
Ann Intern Med. 1997 Oct 15;127(8 Pt 2):757-63
PMID: 9382394
-
Variable selection for propensity score models.
Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Jun 15;163(12):1149-56
PMID: 16624967
-
Evaluating uses of data mining techniques in propensity score estimation: a simulation study.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008 Jun;17(6):546-55
PMID: 18311848
-
Confounder-adjusted estimates of the risk difference using propensity score-based weighting.
Stat Med. 2010 Dec 30;29(30):3126-36
PMID: 21170907
-
How to select covariates to include in the analysis of a clinical trial.
Control Clin Trials. 2000 Aug;21(4):330-42
PMID: 10913808
-
Estimating causal effects from epidemiological data.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Jul;60(7):578-86
PMID: 16790829
-
Propensity scores: from naive enthusiasm to intuitive understanding.
Stat Methods Med Res. 2012 Jun;21(3):273-93
PMID: 21262780
-
Should we adjust for covariates in nonlinear regression analyses of randomized trials?
Control Clin Trials. 1998 Jun;19(3):249-56
PMID: 9620808
-
The consistency statement in causal inference: a definition or an assumption?
Epidemiology. 2009 Jan;20(1):3-5
PMID: 19234395
-
Invited commentary: positivity in practice.
Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Mar 15;171(6):674-7; discussion 678-81
PMID: 20139125
-
Should baseline be a covariate or dependent variable in analyses of change from baseline in clinical trials? by G. F. Liu, K. Lu, R. Mogg, M. Mallick and D. V. Mehrotra, Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:2509-2530.
Stat Med. 2010 Jun 15;29(13):1455-6; author reply 1457
PMID: 20527014
-
Improving propensity score weighting using machine learning.
Stat Med. 2010 Feb 10;29(3):337-46
PMID: 19960510
-
Statistical principles for clinical trials (ICH E9): an introductory note on an international guideline.
Stat Med. 1999 Aug 15;18(15):1903-42
PMID: 10440877
-
Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.
Stat Med. 2004 Oct 15;23(19):2937-60
PMID: 15351954
-
Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.
Stat Med. 1998 Oct 15;17(19):2265-81
PMID: 9802183
-
The role of the c-statistic in variable selection for propensity score models.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011 Mar;20(3):317-20
PMID: 21351315
-
Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials.
Lancet. 2000 Mar 25;355(9209):1064-9
PMID: 10744093
-
Assessing balance in measured baseline covariates when using many-to-one matching on the propensity-score.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008 Dec;17(12):1218-25
PMID: 18972455
-
Variance estimation for stratified propensity score estimators.
Stat Med. 2012 Jul 10;31(15):1617-32
PMID: 22362427
-
Remarks on the method of propensity score.
Stat Med. 2009 Apr 30;28(9):1415-6; author reply 1420-3
PMID: 19340847
-
Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies.
Psychol Methods. 2004 Dec;9(4):403-25
PMID: 15598095
-
Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy following glenohumeral joint distension for adhesive capsulitis: a randomized trial.
Arthritis Rheum. 2007 Aug 15;57(6):1027-37
PMID: 17665470