ArticleStatistics in biosciences2025
Robust Privacy-Preserving Models for Cluster-Level Confounding: Recognizing Disparities in Access to Transplantation.
Article in Statistics in biosciences, 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.
- Individualized empirical null estimation for exact tests of healthcare quality.Statistics in medicine · 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
In health services applications where the patients are clustered within common institutions or geographic regions, it is often of interest to estimate the treatment effects of the medical providers after adjusting for confounding risk factors that are related to patients' choices of provider but beyond the providers' control. While most existing risk-adjustment methods are only capable of controlling for patient-level confounding risk factors (e.g., age or comorbidities), there are often important cluster-level confounding variables (e.g., regional or community-level risk factors) that should be accounted for in provider evaluations. These adjustments for cluster-level confounding factors are further complicated by the limited availability of protected patient health data, the inevitable influence of unobservable confounding factors, and the presence of outlying cluster units. To address these issues, we propose a privacy-preserving model and a novel Pseudo-Bayesian inference method to robustly assess the providers' treatment effects with adjustments for observed cluster-level confounders and corrections for overdispersion from unobserved cluster-level confounding factors. We derive theoretical connections between our proposed estimation method and the Correlated Random Effects model, uncovering several advantages in terms of estimation stability, computational efficiency, and privacy preservation. Motivated by efforts to improve equity in transplant care, we apply these methods to evaluate transplant centers while adjusting for observed geographic disparities in donor organ availability and correcting for overdispersion from unobservable confounding factors, such as the complex impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.