ArticleCardiology and therapy2023
Evaluating the Performance of High-Dimensional Propensity Scores Compared with Standard Propensity Scores for Comparing Antihypertensive Therapies in the CPRD GOLD Database.
Article in Cardiology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Dimensional Disease Risk Score for Dealing With Residual Confounding Bias in Estimating Treatment Effects With a Survival Outcome.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPropensity score (PS) matching is widely used in medical record studies to create balanced treatment groups, but relies on prior knowledge of confounding factors. High-dimensional PS (hdPS) is a semi-automated algorithm that selects variables with the highest potential for confounding from medical databases. The objective of this study was to evaluate performance of hdPS and PS when used to compare antihypertensive therapies in the UK clinical practice research datalink (CPRD) GOLD database.
methodsPatients initiating antihypertensive treatment with either monotherapy or bitherapy were extracted from the CPRD GOLD database. Simulated datasets were generated using plasmode simulations with a marginal hazard ratio (HRm) of 1.29 for bitherapy versus monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control at 3 months. Either 16 or 36 known covariates were forced into the PS and hdPS models, and 200 additional variables were automatically selected for hdPS. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of removing known confounders from the database on hdPS performance.
resultsWith 36 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.31 (0.05) for hdPS and 1.30 (0.04) for PS matching; the crude HR was 0.68 (0.61). Using 16 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.23 (0.10) and 1.09 (0.20) for hdPS and PS, respectively. Performance of hdPS was not compromised when known confounders were removed from the database. RESULTS ON REAL DATA: With 49 investigator-selected covariates, the HR was 1.18 (95% CI 1.10; 1.26) for PS and 1.33 (95% CI 1.22; 1.46) for hdPS. Both methods yielded the same conclusion, suggesting superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for time to blood pressure control.
conclusionHdPS can identify proxies for missing confounders, thereby having an advantage over PS in case of unobserved covariates. Both PS and hdPS showed superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control.
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.