ArticleResearch in nursing & health2022
Using probabilistic record linkage and propensity-score matching to identify a community-based comparison population.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In retrospective cohort studies of interventions disseminated to communities, it is challenging to find comparison groups with high-quality data for evaluation. We present one methodological approach as part of our study of birth outcomes of second-born children in a home visiting (HV) program targeting first-time mothers. We used probabilistic record linkage to link Connecticut's Nurturing Families Network (NFN) HV program and birth-certificate data for children born from 2005 to 2015. We identified two potential comparison groups: a propensity-score-matched group from the remaining birth certificate sample and eligible-but-unenrolled families. An analysis of interpregnancy interval (IPI) is presented to exemplify the approach. We identified the birth certificates of 4822 NFN families. The propensity-score-matched group had 14,219 families (3-to-1 matching) and we identified 1101 eligible-but-unenrolled families. Covariates were well balanced for the propensity-score-matched group, but poorly balanced for the eligible-but-unenrolled group. No program effect on IPI was found. By combining propensity-score matching and probabilistic record linkage, we were able to retrospectively identify relatively large comparison groups for quasi-experimental research. Using birth certificate data, we accessed outcomes for all of these individuals from a single data source. Multiple comparison groups allow us to confirm findings when each method has some limitations. Other researchers seeking community-based comparison groups could consider a similar approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.