Paper detail

Outcome Adaptive Propensity Score Methods for Handling Censoring and High-Dimensionality: Application to Insurance Claims

Propensity scores are commonly used to reduce the confounding bias in non-randomized observational studies for estimating the average treatment effect. An important assumption underlying this approach is that all confounders that are associated with both the treatment and the outcome of interest are measured and included in the propensity score model. In the absence of strong prior knowledge about potential confounders, researchers may agnostically want to adjust for a high-dimensional set of pre-treatment variables. As such, variable selection procedure is needed for propensity score estimation. In addition, recent studies show that including variables related to treatment only in the propensity score model may inflate the variance of the treatment effect estimates, while including variables that are predictive of only the outcome can improve efficiency. In this paper, we propose a flexible approach to incorporating outcome-covariate relationship in the propensity score model by including the predicted binary outcome probability (OP) as a covariate. Our approach can be easily adapted to an ensemble of variable selection methods, including regularization methods and modern machine learning tools based on classification and regression trees. We evaluate our method to estimate the treatment effects on a binary outcome, which is possibly censored, among multiple treatment groups. Simulation studies indicate that incorporating OP for estimating the propensity scores can improve statistical efficiency and protect against model misspecification. The proposed methods are applied to a cohort of advanced stage prostate cancer patients identified from a private insurance claims database for comparing the adverse effects of four commonly used drugs for treating castration-resistant prostate cancer.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.