ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Machine Learning Algorithms to Estimate Propensity Scores in Health Policy Evaluation: A Scoping Review.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Quasi-experimental design has been widely used in causal inference for health policy impact evaluation. However, due to the non-randomized treatment used, there is great potential for bias in the assessment of the results, which can be reduced by using propensity score (PS) methods. In this context, this article aims to map the literature concerning the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms for propensity score estimation. (2) Methods: A scoping review was carried out in the PubMed, EMBASE, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Explore, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, Compendex, and gray literature (ProQuest and Google Scholar) databases, based on the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. This scoping review aims to identify ML models and their accuracy and the characteristics of studies on causal inference for health policy impacts, with a specific focus on PS estimation using ML. (3) Results: Seven studies were included in the review from 3018 references searched. In general, tree-based ML models were used for PS estimation. Most of the studies did not show or mention the performance metrics of the selected models, focusing instead on discussing the treatment effects under analysis. (4) Conclusions: Despite important aspects of model development and evaluation being under-reported, this scoping review provides insights into the recent use of ML algorithms in health policy impact evaluation.
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.