Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25530706›Full record

ArticleHealth services & outcomes research methodology2014

ADDRESSING CONFOUNDING WHEN ESTIMATING THE EFFECTS OF LATENT CLASSES ON A DISTAL OUTCOME.

Megan S Schuler, Jeannie-Marie S Leoutsakos, Elizabeth A Stuart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services & outcomes research methodology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Ensuring Causal, Not Casual, Inference.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Coping profiles and subjective well-being among people living with HIV: less intensive coping corresponds with better well-being.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Megan S SchulerDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, phone: 803-730-3476, fax: 814-863-0000.
Jeannie-Marie S LeoutsakosDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21224.
Elizabeth A StuartDepartment of Mental Health, Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205.

Funding

THE REFINEMENT &APPLICATION OF MEDICAL DECISION MAKING IN PREVENTION SCIENCESP50DA010075 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI LANZA, STEPHANIE T · 1996 to 2014
$24.5M
PREVENTION AND METHODOLOGY TRAINING (PAMT)T32DA017629 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI Eric D Claus, Rina D Eiden · 2005 to 2026
$9.5M
The Causal Effect of Community-Based Treatment for YouthsR01DA015697 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI GRIFFIN, BETH ANN · 2003 to 2018
$2.8M
Using propensity scores for causal inference with covariate measurement errorR01MH099010 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI STUART, ELIZABETH A. · 2013 to 2016
$1.1M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA010075NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA015697NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA017629NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH099010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Confounding is widely recognized in settings where all variables are fully observed, yet recognition of and statistical methods to address confounding in the context of latent class regression are slowly emerging. In this study we focus on confounding when regressing a distal outcome on latent class; extending standard confounding methods is not straightforward when the treatment of interest is a latent variable. We describe a recent 1-step method, as well as two 3-step methods (modal and pseudoclass assignment) that incorporate propensity score weighting. Using simulated data, we compare the performance of these three adjusted methods to an unadjusted 1-step and unadjusted 3-step method. We also present an applied example regarding adolescent substance use treatment that examines the effect of treatment service class on subsequent substance use problems. Our simulations indicated that the adjusted 1-step method and both adjusted 3-step methods significantly reduced bias arising from confounding relative to the unadjusted 1-step and 3-step approaches. However, the adjusted 1-step method performed better than the adjusted 3-step methods with regard to bias and 95% CI coverage, particularly when class separation was poor. Our applied example also highlighted the importance of addressing confounding - both unadjusted methods indicated significant differences across treatment classes with respect to the outcome, yet these class differences were not significant when using any of the three adjusted methods. Potential confounding should be carefully considered when conducting latent class regression with a distal outcome; failure to do so may results in significantly biased effect estimates or incorrect inferences.

Indexed as

confoundinglatent classlatent treatmentpropensity scores

Identifiers

PMID25530706
PMCPMC4269287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.