Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 730

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Results of Multivariable Logistic Regression, Propensity Matching, Propensity Adjustment, and Propensity-based Weighting under Conditions of Nonuniform Effect

Kurth, Tobias, Walker, Alexander M., Glynn, Robert J., Chan, K. Arnold, Gaziano, J. Michael, Berger, Klaus, Robins, James M.·2006·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

Observational studies often provide the only available information about treatment effects. Control of confounding, however, remains challenging. The authors compared five methods for evaluating the effect of tissue plasminogen activator on death among 6,269 ischemic stroke patients registered in a German stroke registry: multivariable logistic regression, propensity score-matched analysis, regression adjustment with the propensity score, and two propensity score-based weighted methods-one estimating the treatment effect in the entire study population (inverse-probability-of-treatment weights), another in the treated population (standardized-mortality-ratio weights). Between 2000 and 2001, 212 patients received tissue plasminogen activator. The crude odds ratio between tissue plasminogen activator and death was 3.35 (95% confidence interval: 2.28, 4.91). The adjusted odds ratio depended strongly on the adjustment method, ranging from 1.11 (95% confidence interval: 0.67, 1.84) for the standardized-mortality-ratio weighted to 10.77 (95% confidence interval: 2.47, 47.04) for the inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted analysis. For treated patients with a low propensity score, risks of dying were high. Exclusion of patients with a propensity score of <5% yielded comparable odds ratios of approximately 1 for all methods. High levels of nonuniform treatment effect render summary estimates very sensitive to the weighting system explicit or implicit in an adjustment technique. Researchers need to be clear about the population for which an overall treatment estimate is most suitable.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/aje/kwj047

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. D'Agostino RB, Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med1998;17:2265–81. · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::aid-sim918>3.0.co;2-b
  2. Robins JM, Greenland S. The role of model selection in causal inference from nonexperimental data. Am J Epidemiol1986;123:392–402. · DOI
  3. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Califf RM, et al. Regression modelling strategies for improved prognostic prediction. Stat Med1984;3:143–52. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med1996;15:361–87. · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19960229)15:4<361::aid-sim168>3.0.co;2-4
  5. Greenland S, Schwartzbaum JA, Finkle WD. Problems due to small samples and sparse data in conditional logistic regression analysis. Am J Epidemiol2000;151:531–9. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika1983;70:41–55. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporates the propensity score. Am Stat1985;39:33–8. · doi:10.1080/00031305.1985.10479383 · Paper page
  8. Rubin DB, Thomas N. Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice. Biometrics1996;52:249–64. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Rubin DB, Thomas N. Combining propensity score matching with additional adjustments for prognostic covariates. J Am Stat Assoc2000;95:573–85. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Robins JM. Marginal structural models. In: 1997 Proceedings of the Section on Bayesian Statistical Science. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association, 1998:1–10.
  11. Hirano K, Imbens GW, Ridder G. Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica2003;71:1161–89. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Sato T, Matsuyama Y. Marginal structural models as a tool for standardization. Epidemiology2003;14:680–6. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Katzan IL, Furlan AJ, Lloyd LE, et al. Use of tissue-type plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke: the Cleveland area experience. JAMA2000;283:1151–8. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Reed SD, Cramer SC, Blough DK, et al. Treatment with tissue plasminogen activator and inpatient mortality rates for patients with ischemic stroke treated in community hospitals. Stroke2001;32:1832–40. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Heuschmann PU, Berger K, Misselwitz B, et al. Frequency of thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke and the risk of in-hospital mortality: the German Stroke Registers Study Group. Stroke2003;34:1106–13. · DOI
  16. Heuschmann PU, Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Misselwitz B, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality and attributable risks of death after ischemic stroke: the German Stroke Registers Study Group. Arch Intern Med2004;164:1761–8. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Heuschmann PU, Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Roether J, et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with thrombolytic therapy. JAMA2004;292:1831–8. · DOI
  18. Hacke W, Kaste M, Fieschi C, et al. Intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for acute hemispheric stroke. The European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS). JAMA1995;274:1017–25. · doi:10.1001/jama.274.13.1017 · Paper page
  19. Hacke W, Kaste M, Fieschi C, et al. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of thrombolytic therapy with intravenous alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke (ECASS II). Second European-Australasian Acute Stroke Study Investigators. Lancet1998;352:1245–51. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Clark WM, Wissman S, Albers GW, et al. Recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (Alteplase) for ischemic stroke 3 to 5 hours after symptom onset. The ATLANTIS Study: a randomized controlled trial. Alteplase Thrombolysis for Acute Noninterventional Therapy in Ischemic Stroke. JAMA1999;282:2019–26. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Schmidt WP, Berger K, Taeger D, et al. Influence of institutional factors in neurological, medical and geriatric departments on length of stay in patients with stroke. (In German). Dtsch Med Wochenschr2003;128:979–83. · doi:10.1055/s-2003-38956
  22. Schmidt WP, Taeger D, Buecker-Nott HJ, et al. The impact of the day of the week and month of admission on the length of hospital stay in stroke patients. Cerebrovasc Dis2003;16:247–52. · doi:10.1159/000071123
  23. Berger K, Weltermann B, Kolominsky-Rabas P, et al. The reliability of stroke scales. The German version of NIHSS, ESS and Rankin scales. (In German). Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr1999;67:81–93. · DOI
  24. Hernan MA, Brumback B, Robins JM. Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men. Epidemiology2000;11:561–70. · DOI · Paper page
  25. Wardlaw JM, Sandercock PA, Berge E. Thrombolytic therapy with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke: where do we go from here? A cumulative meta-analysis. Stroke2003;34:1437–42. · DOI
  26. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The bias due to incomplete matching. Biometrics1985;41:103–16. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Braitman LE, Rosenbaum PR. Rare outcomes, common treatments: analytic strategies using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med2002;137:693–5. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Sturmer T, Schneeweiss S, Brookhart MA, et al. Analytic strategies to adjust confounding using exposure propensity scores and disease risk scores: nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and short-term mortality in the elderly. Am J Epidemiol2005;161:891–8. · DOI
  29. Shah BR, Laupacis A, Hux JE, et al. Propensity score methods gave similar results to traditional regression modeling in observational studies: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol2005;58:550–9. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Scharfstein DO, Rotnitzky A, Robins JM. Adjusting for non-ignorable drop-out using semiparametric non-response models. J Am Stat Assoc1999;94:1096–120. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Potter FJ. The effect of weight trimming on nonlinear survey estimates. In: Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods of the American Statistical Association, San Francisco, California, 1993. J Am Stat Assoc1993:758–63.

Metadata

Authors
Kurth, T., Walker, A. M., Glynn, R. J., Chan, K. A., Gaziano, J. M., Berger, K., & Robins, J. M.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2005-12-21
Volume
163
Issue
3
Pages
262-270
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2122532950
Cited by
730
References
5
FWCI
12.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Results of Multivariable Logistic Regression, Propensity Matching, Propensity Adjustment, and Propensity-based Weighting under Conditions of Nonuniform Effect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/aje/kwj047
The paper
Kurth, T., Walker, A. M., Glynn, R. J., Chan, K. A., Gaziano, J. M., Berger, K., & Robins, J. M. (2006). Results of Multivariable Logistic Regression, Propensity Matching, Propensity Adjustment, and Propensity-based Weighting under Conditions of Nonuniform Effect. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwj047

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.