ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
What's the Weight? Estimating Controlled Outcome Differences in Complex Surveys for Health Disparities Research.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. 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.
- Causal Inference With Survey Data: A Robust Framework for Propensity Score Weighting in Probability and Non-Probability Samples.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this work, we are motivated by the problem of estimating racial disparities in health outcomes, specifically the average controlled difference (ACD) in telomere length between Black and White individuals, using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). To do so, we build a propensity for race to properly adjust for other social determinants while characterizing the controlled effect of race on telomere length. Propensity score methods are broadly employed with observational data as a tool to achieve covariate balance, but how to implement them in complex surveys is less studied-in particular, when the survey weights depend on the group variable under comparison (as the NHANES sampling scheme depends on self-reported race). We propose identification formulas to properly estimate the ACD in outcomes between Black and White individuals, with appropriate weighting for both covariate imbalance across the two racial groups and generalizability. Via extensive simulation, we show that our proposed methods outperform traditional analytic approaches in terms of bias, mean squared error, and coverage when estimating the ACD for our setting of interest. In our data, we find that evidence of racial differences in telomere length between Black and White individuals attenuates after accounting for confounding by socioeconomic factors and utilizing appropriate propensity score and survey weighting techniques. Software to implement these methods and code to reproduce our results can be found in the R package svycdiff, available through the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) at cran.r-project.org/web/packages/svycdiff/, or in a development version on GitHub at github.com/salernos/svycdiff.
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.