Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30649165›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2019

Evaluating Flexible Modeling of Continuous Covariates in Inverse-Weighted Estimators.

Ryan P Kyle, Erica E M Moodie, Marina B Klein, Michał Abrahamowicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Causal Model Building in the Context of Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Comparative effectiveness of ventricular tachycardia ablation vs. escalated antiarrhythmic drug therapy by location of myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VANISH trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Ryan P KyleDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Erica E M MoodieDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Marina B KleinDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Michał AbrahamowiczDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP-130402Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP-81275CIHR CTN222CIHR FDN-143270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Correct specification of the exposure model is essential for unbiased estimation in marginal structural models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weights. However, although flexible modeling is commonplace when estimating effects of continuous covariates in outcome models, its use is less frequent in estimation of inverse probability weights. Using simulations, we assess the accuracy of the treatment effect estimates and covariate balance obtained with different exposure model specifications when the true relationship between a continuous, possibly time-varying covariate Lt and the logit of the probability of exposure is nonlinear. Specifically, we compare 4 approaches to modeling the effect of Lt when estimating inverse probability weights: a linear function, the covariate-balancing propensity score, and 2 easy-to-implement flexible methods that relax the assumption of linearity: cubic regression splines and fractional polynomials. Using data from 2 empirical studies, we compare linear exposure models with flexible exposure models to estimate the effect of sustained virological response to hepatitis C virus treatment on the progression of liver fibrosis. Our simulation results demonstrate that ignoring important nonlinear relationships when fitting the exposure model may provide poorer covariate balance and induce substantial bias in the estimated exposure-outcome associations. Analysts should routinely consider flexible modeling of continuous covariates when estimating inverse-probability-of-treatment weights.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalEpidemiologic MethodsModels, StatisticalCausalityComputer SimulationDisease ProgressionHepatitis CHumansLiver CirrhosisLongitudinal Studiescausal inferencefractional polynomialsmarginal structural modelsmodel misspecificationsplines

Identifiers

PMID30649165
PMCPMC6545287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.