Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40013476›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2025

Outcome adaptive propensity score methods for handling censoring and high-dimensionality: Application to insurance claims.

Jiacong Du, Youfei Yu, Min Zhang, Zhenke Wu, Andrew M Ryan, Bhramar Mukherjee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Outcome-Adaptive Lasso for Cox Proportional Hazards Model.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Jiacong DuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7768-9083
Youfei YuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Min ZhangVanke School of Public Health, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Zhenke WuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Andrew M RyanDepartment of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2566-7763
Bhramar MukherjeeDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

MI-CARES: The Michigan Cancer and Research on the Environment StudyUH3CA267907 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Dana Dolinoy, Bhramar Mukherjee · 2024 to 2026
$6.0M
MI-CARES: The Michigan Cancer and Research on the Environment StudyUG3CA267907 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DOLINOY, DANA, MUKHERJEE, BHRAMAR · 2021 to 2022
$2.2M
Statistical and computational methods for rare variant association analysisR01HG008773 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MUKHERJEE, BHRAMAR · 2016 to 2020
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS UG3 CA267907NCI NIH HHS UH3 CA267907NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG008773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Propensity scores are commonly used to reduce the confounding bias in non-randomized observational studies for estimating the average treatment effect. An important assumption underlying this approach is that all confounders that are associated with both the treatment and the outcome of interest are measured and included in the propensity score model. In the absence of strong prior knowledge about potential confounders, researchers may agnostically want to adjust for a high-dimensional set of pre-treatment variables. As such, variable selection procedure is needed for propensity score estimation. In addition, studies show that including variables related to treatment only in the propensity score model may inflate the variance of the treatment effect estimators, while including variables that are predictive of only the outcome can improve efficiency. In this article, we propose to incorporate outcome-covariate relationship in the propensity score model by including the predicted binary outcome probability as a covariate. Our approach can be easily adapted to an ensemble of variable selection methods, including regularization methods and modern machine-learning tools based on classification and regression trees. We evaluate our method to estimate the treatment effects on a binary outcome, which is possibly censored, across multiple treatment groups. Simulation studies indicate that incorporating outcome probability for estimating the propensity scores can improve statistical efficiency and protect against model misspecification. The proposed methods are applied to a cohort of advanced-stage prostate cancer patients identified from a private insurance claims database for comparing the adverse effects of four commonly used drugs for treating castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Insurance Claim ReviewPropensity ScoreBiasHumansMaleModels, StatisticalObservational Studies as TopicOutcome Assessment, Health CareProstatic NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeCausal inferenceclaims dataconfounder selectionhigh-dimensionaloutcome-adaptivepropensity scorestree-based methods

Identifiers

PMID40013476
PMCPMC12893967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.