Evaluating the Performance of High-Dimensional Propensity Scores Compared with Standard Propensity Scores for Comparing Antihypertensive Therapies in the CPRD GOLD Database.

IF 3 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Virginie Simon, Jade Vadel
{"title":"Evaluating the Performance of High-Dimensional Propensity Scores Compared with Standard Propensity Scores for Comparing Antihypertensive Therapies in the CPRD GOLD Database.","authors":"Virginie Simon,&nbsp;Jade Vadel","doi":"10.1007/s40119-023-00316-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Propensity score (PS) matching is widely used in medical record studies to create balanced treatment groups, but relies on prior knowledge of confounding factors. High-dimensional PS (hdPS) is a semi-automated algorithm that selects variables with the highest potential for confounding from medical databases. The objective of this study was to evaluate performance of hdPS and PS when used to compare antihypertensive therapies in the UK clinical practice research datalink (CPRD) GOLD database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients initiating antihypertensive treatment with either monotherapy or bitherapy were extracted from the CPRD GOLD database. Simulated datasets were generated using plasmode simulations with a marginal hazard ratio (HRm) of 1.29 for bitherapy versus monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control at 3 months. Either 16 or 36 known covariates were forced into the PS and hdPS models, and 200 additional variables were automatically selected for hdPS. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of removing known confounders from the database on hdPS performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>With 36 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.31 (0.05) for hdPS and 1.30 (0.04) for PS matching; the crude HR was 0.68 (0.61). Using 16 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.23 (0.10) and 1.09 (0.20) for hdPS and PS, respectively. Performance of hdPS was not compromised when known confounders were removed from the database.</p><p><strong>Results on real data: </strong>With 49 investigator-selected covariates, the HR was 1.18 (95% CI 1.10; 1.26) for PS and 1.33 (95% CI 1.22; 1.46) for hdPS. Both methods yielded the same conclusion, suggesting superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for time to blood pressure control.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>HdPS can identify proxies for missing confounders, thereby having an advantage over PS in case of unobserved covariates. Both PS and hdPS showed superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control.</p>","PeriodicalId":9561,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology and Therapy","volume":"12 2","pages":"393-408"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/62/bd/40119_2023_Article_316.PMC10209360.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40119-023-00316-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Propensity score (PS) matching is widely used in medical record studies to create balanced treatment groups, but relies on prior knowledge of confounding factors. High-dimensional PS (hdPS) is a semi-automated algorithm that selects variables with the highest potential for confounding from medical databases. The objective of this study was to evaluate performance of hdPS and PS when used to compare antihypertensive therapies in the UK clinical practice research datalink (CPRD) GOLD database.

Methods: Patients initiating antihypertensive treatment with either monotherapy or bitherapy were extracted from the CPRD GOLD database. Simulated datasets were generated using plasmode simulations with a marginal hazard ratio (HRm) of 1.29 for bitherapy versus monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control at 3 months. Either 16 or 36 known covariates were forced into the PS and hdPS models, and 200 additional variables were automatically selected for hdPS. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of removing known confounders from the database on hdPS performance.

Results: With 36 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.31 (0.05) for hdPS and 1.30 (0.04) for PS matching; the crude HR was 0.68 (0.61). Using 16 known covariates, the estimated HRm (RMSE) was 1.23 (0.10) and 1.09 (0.20) for hdPS and PS, respectively. Performance of hdPS was not compromised when known confounders were removed from the database.

Results on real data: With 49 investigator-selected covariates, the HR was 1.18 (95% CI 1.10; 1.26) for PS and 1.33 (95% CI 1.22; 1.46) for hdPS. Both methods yielded the same conclusion, suggesting superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for time to blood pressure control.

Conclusion: HdPS can identify proxies for missing confounders, thereby having an advantage over PS in case of unobserved covariates. Both PS and hdPS showed superiority of bitherapy over monotherapy for reaching blood pressure control.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

评价CPRD GOLD数据库中高维度倾向评分与标准倾向评分在比较降压治疗中的表现
简介:倾向评分(PS)匹配广泛应用于病历研究,以创建平衡的治疗组,但依赖于混杂因素的先验知识。高维PS (hdPS)是一种半自动算法,它从医学数据库中选择最有可能混淆的变量。本研究的目的是评估hdPS和PS在英国临床实践研究数据链(CPRD) GOLD数据库中用于比较降压治疗的性能。方法:从CPRD GOLD数据库中提取开始接受单药或双药降压治疗的患者。利用等离子体模型模拟生成模拟数据集,生物疗法与单一疗法在3个月达到血压控制的边际风险比(HRm)为1.29。将16或36个已知协变量强制纳入PS和hdPS模型,并自动为hdPS选择200个额外变量。进行敏感性分析以评估从数据库中删除已知混杂因素对hdPS性能的影响。结果:在已知36个协变量的情况下,hdPS的估计HRm (RMSE)为1.31 (0.05),PS匹配的估计HRm (RMSE)为1.30 (0.04);粗HR为0.68(0.61)。使用16个已知协变量,hdPS和PS的估计HRm (RMSE)分别为1.23(0.10)和1.09(0.20)。当从数据库中删除已知的混杂因素时,hdPS的性能不会受到影响。真实数据的结果:在49个研究者选择的协变量中,风险比为1.18 (95% CI 1.10;PS为1.26),1.33 (95% CI 1.22;1.46)的hdPS。两种方法都得出了相同的结论,表明生物疗法在时间上优于单一疗法来控制血压。结论:HdPS可以识别缺失混杂因素的代理,因此在未观察到的协变量情况下比PS具有优势。PS和hdPS在达到血压控制方面均显示出生物疗法优于单一疗法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiology and Therapy
Cardiology and Therapy CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope Cardiology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer reviewed (single-blind), rapid-publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of cardiovascular therapies and interventions, including devices. Studies relating to diagnosis and diagnostics, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, as well as patient care, management and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, ischaemic heart disease and acute cardiac care, myocardial, valvular, pericardial and congenital heart disease, vascular and pulmonary disease (including hypertension), arrhythmias, heart failure, non-invasive diagnostic techniques, and invasive and interventional cardiology as well as cardiovascular surgery. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/case series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Cardiolology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of cardiovascular therapies. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Cardiology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of your article for publication, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of £3650/€4500/$5100. The journal will consider fee discounts for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Open Access All articles published by Cardiology and Therapy are published open access. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case by case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the preprint is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Copyright Cardiology and Therapy is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact matthew.evans@springer.com
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信