Confounder Adjustment Using the Disease Risk Score: A Proposal for Weighting Methods

• Autores: Tri-Long Nguyen, Thomas P A Debray, Bora Youn, Gabrielle Simoneau, Gary S. Collins
• Localización: American journal of epidemiology, ISSN-e 1476-6256, ISSN 0002-9262, Vol. 193, Nº. 2, 2024, págs. 377-388
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo  1    2 (pdf) 
• Resumen

  • Abstract Propensity score analysis is a common approach to addressing confounding in nonrandomized studies. Its implementation, however, requires important assumptions (e.g., positivity). The disease risk score (DRS) is an alternative confounding score that can relax some of these assumptions. Like the propensity score, the DRS summarizes multiple confounders into a single score, on which conditioning by matching allows the estimation of causal effects. However, matching relies on arbitrary choices for pruning out data (e.g., matching ratio, algorithm, and caliper width) and may be computationally demanding. Alternatively, weighting methods, common in propensity score analysis, are easy to implement and may entail fewer choices, yet none have been developed for the DRS. Here we present 2 weighting approaches: One derives directly from inverse probability weighting; the other, named target distribution weighting, relates to importance sampling. We empirically show that inverse probability weighting and target distribution weighting display performance comparable to matching techniques in terms of bias but outperform them in terms of efficiency (mean squared error) and computational speed (up to >870 times faster in an illustrative study). We illustrate implementation of the methods in 2 case studies where we investigate placebo treatments for multiple sclerosis and administration of aspirin in stroke patients.