ArticleBiometrics2024
Causal meta-analysis by integrating multiple observational studies with multivariate outcomes.
Article in Biometrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bayesian Estimation of Propensity Scores for Integrating Multiple Cohorts with High-Dimensional Covariates.Statistics in biosciences · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Integrating multiple observational studies to make unconfounded causal or descriptive comparisons of group potential outcomes in a large natural population is challenging. Moreover, retrospective cohorts, being convenience samples, are usually unrepresentative of the natural population of interest and have groups with unbalanced covariates. We propose a general covariate-balancing framework based on pseudo-populations that extends established weighting methods to the meta-analysis of multiple retrospective cohorts with multiple groups. Additionally, by maximizing the effective sample sizes of the cohorts, we propose a FLEXible, Optimized, and Realistic (FLEXOR) weighting method appropriate for integrative analyses. We develop new weighted estimators for unconfounded inferences on wide-ranging population-level features and estimands relevant to group comparisons of quantitative, categorical, or multivariate outcomes. Asymptotic properties of these estimators are examined. Through simulation studies and meta-analyses of TCGA datasets, we demonstrate the versatility and reliability of the proposed weighting strategy, especially for the FLEXOR pseudo-population.
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.