Cited by 88Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Propensity Score Methods

Open access
Rubin, Donald B.·2010·American Journal of Ophthalmology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.08.024

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rubin, D. B.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Rubin, Donald B.
Venue
American Journal of Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
149
Issue
1
Pages
7-9
ISSN
0002-9394 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979292345
Cited by
88
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA023879)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
propensity score methods, causal effect estimation, non-randomized studies, observational study design, ophthalmology research
MeSH terms
Humans, Ophthalmology, Probability, Models, Statistical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review