Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30568510›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2018

Combining distributed regression and propensity scores: a doubly privacy-protecting analytic method for multicenter research.

Sengwee Toh, Robert Wellman, R Yates Coley, Casie Horgan, Jessica Sturtevant, Erick Moyneur, Cheri Janning, Roy Pardee, Karen J Coleman, David Arterburn and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Data Integration in Causal Inference.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational statistics
    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

13 authors.

Sengwee TohDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA, darren_toh@harvardpilgrim.org.
Robert WellmanKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
R Yates ColeyKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Casie HorganDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA, darren_toh@harvardpilgrim.org.
Jessica SturtevantDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA, darren_toh@harvardpilgrim.org.
Erick MoyneurStatLog Econometrics, Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.
Cheri JanningDuke Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Roy PardeeKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Karen J ColemanKaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, USA.
David ArterburnKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Kathleen McTigueDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jane AnauKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Andrea J CookKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSharing of detailed individual-level data continues to pose challenges in multi-center studies. This issue can be addressed in part by using analytic methods that require only summary-level information to perform the desired multivariable-adjusted analysis. We examined the feasibility and empirical validity of 1) conducting multivariable-adjusted distributed linear regression and 2) combining distributed linear regression with propensity scores, in a large distributed data network. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe compared percent total weight loss 1-year postsurgery between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy procedure among 43,110 patients from 36 health systems in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. We adjusted for baseline demographic and clinical variables as individual covariates, deciles of propensity scores, or both, in three separate outcome regression models. We used distributed linear regression, a method that requires only summary-level information (specifically, sums of squares and cross products matrix) from sites, to fit the three ordinary least squares linear regression models. A comparison set of analyses that used pooled deidentified individual-level data from sites served as the reference.

resultsDistributed linear regression produced results identical to those from the corresponding pooled individual-level data analysis for all variables in all three models. The maximum numerical difference in the parameter estimate or standard error for all the variables was 3×10

conclusionDistributed linear regression analysis is a feasible and valid analytic method in multicenter studies for one-time continuous outcomes. Combining distributed regression with propensity scores via modeling offers more privacy protection and analytic flexibility.

Indexed as

distributed data networksdistributed regressionprivacy-protecting methodspropensity score

Identifiers

PMID30568510
PMCPMC6267363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.