ArticleScientific reports2025
Methodological guidance on implementing propensity score matching in observational studies of kidney transplantation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Observational studies in kidney transplantation often face confounding bias due to the absence of randomization, which can compromise validity and limit generalizability. Propensity score matching (PSM) helps mitigate this bias by mimicking random assignment. This guide outlines the implementation of PSM in kidney transplant research, focusing on methodology, practical considerations, common pitfalls, and reporting standards. We summarize key steps, including selecting covariates related to both treatment and the probability of receiving a transplant, estimating propensity scores, applying appropriate matching techniques, assessing balance, and conducting sensitivity analyses to test robustness. Practical considerations include ensuring sufficient overlap in propensity scores and balancing sample size with matching quality. Common challenges involve omitting relevant covariates, inadequate overlap, suboptimal matching, and loss of statistical power due to reduced sample size. By adhering to rigorous methodological practices and transparent reporting, researchers can improve the credibility and impact of their findings. When carefully implemented, PSM can substantially reduce confounding bias, enhance causal inference, and ultimately support better decision-making in kidney transplantation research. The example provided is illustrative only and does not replace a formal time-to-event analysis accounting for competing risks.
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.