The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Alternative approaches for confounding adjustment in observational studies using weighting based on the propensity score: a primer for practitioners
Open accessAbstract
This report aims to provide methodological guidance to help practitioners select the most appropriate weighting method based on propensity scores for their analysis out of many available options (eg, inverse probability treatment weights, standardised mortality ratio weights, fine stratification weights, overlap weights, and matching weights), and outlines recommendations for transparent reporting of studies using weighting based on the propensity scores.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Within each cohort, we used propensity score fine stratification weighting to account for confounding.33”
From Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and risk of suicidality among patients with type 2 diabetes: active comparator, new user cohort study (2025) · cites this paper as [33]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In addition, several authors have reported the development of depression and other comorbidities in prostate cancer patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy.48,49”
From Mindfulness-based interventions for psychological wellbeing and quality of life in men with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2021) · cites this paper as [49]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects
ROSENBAUM, P. R., & RUBIN, D. B. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 · Cited by 31,241
Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology
Robins, J. M., Hernán, M. Á., & Brumback, B. (2000) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-200009000-00011 · Cited by 5,581
Austin, P. C., & Stuart, E. A. (2015) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6607 · Cited by 4,495
Constructing Inverse Probability Weights for Marginal Structural Models
Cole, S. R., & Hernan, M. A. (2008) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwn164 · Cited by 2,796
Austin, P. (2009) · Communications in statistics. Simulation and computation · doi:10.1080/03610910902859574 · Cited by 2,323
Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions
Rubin, D. B. (2005) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214504000001880 · Cited by 2,173
The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios
Austin, P. C. (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5705 · Cited by 1,006
Rosenbaum, P. R. (1987) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478441 · Cited by 998
Kurth, T., Walker, A. M., Glynn, R. J., Chan, K. A., Gaziano, J. M., Berger, K., & Robins, J. M. (2005) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwj047 · Cited by 733
Addressing extreme propensity scores via the overlap weights
Li, F., & Thomas, L. E. (2018) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwy201 · Cited by 694
Stürmer, T., Joshi, M., Glynn, R. J., Avorn, J., Rothman, K. J., & Schneeweiß, S. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.004 · Cited by 668
Propensity Score Methods for Confounding Control in Nonexperimental Research
Brookhart, M. A., Wyss, R., Layton, J. B., & Stürmer, T. (2013) · Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.113.000359 · Cited by 590
Indications for propensity scores and review of their use in pharmacoepidemiology
Glynn, R. J., Schneeweiss, S., & Stürmer, T. (2006) · Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology · doi:10.1111/j.1742-7843.2006.pto_293.x · Cited by 541
Weight Trimming and Propensity Score Weighting
Lee, B. K., Lessler, J., & Stuart, E. A. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018174 · Cited by 529
A Weighting Analogue to Pair Matching in Propensity Score Analysis
Li, L., & Greene, T. (2013) · The International Journal of Biostatistics · doi:10.1515/ijb-2012-0030 · Cited by 358
Naimi, A. I., Cole, S. R., & Kennedy, E. H. (2016) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyw323 · Cited by 339
Metrics for covariate balance in cohort studies of causal effects
Franklin, J., Rassen, J. A., Ackermann, D., Bartels, D., & Schneeweiss, S. (2014) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6058 · Cited by 316
Self-citationAntipsychotic Use in Pregnancy and the Risk for Congenital Malformations
Huybrechts, K. F., Hernández–Dı́az, S., Patorno, E., Desai, R. J., Mogun, H., Dejene, S. Z., Cohen, J. M., Panchaud, A., Cohen, L. S., & Bateman, B. T. (2016) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.1520 · Cited by 293
Self-citationEffects of Adjusting for Instrumental Variables on Bias and Precision of Effect Estimates
Myers, J. A., Rassen, J. A., Gagne, J. J., Huybrechts, K. F., Schneeweiß, S., Rothman, K. J., Joffe, M. M., & Glynn, R. J. (2011) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwr364 · Cited by 286
Evaluating uses of data mining techniques in propensity score estimation: a simulation study
Setoguchi, S., Schneeweiß, S., Brookhart, M. A., Glynn, R. J., & Cook, E. F. (2008) · Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · doi:10.1002/pds.1555 · Cited by 265
Desai, R. J., Rothman, K. J., Bateman, B. T., Hernández–Dı́az, S., & Huybrechts, K. F. (2016) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0000000000000595 · Cited by 252
Self-citationOn regression adjustment for the propensity score
Vansteelandt, S., & Daniel, R. (2014) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6207 · Cited by 180
Matching Weights to Simultaneously Compare Three Treatment Groups
Yoshida, K., Hernández–Dı́az, S., Solomon, D. H., Jackson, J. W., Gagne, J. J., Glynn, R. J., & Franklin, J. M. (2017) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0000000000000627 · Cited by 175
Self-citationStürmer, T., Schneeweiß, S., Brookhart, M. A., Rothman, K. J., Avorn, J., & Glynn, R. J. (2005) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwi106 · Cited by 171
Lauffenburger, J. C., Farley, J. F., Gehi, A. K., Rhoney, D. H., Brookhart, M. A., & Fang, G. (2015) · Journal of the American Heart Association · doi:10.1161/jaha.115.001798 · Cited by 162
Marginal Mean Weighting Through Stratification: Adjustment for Selection Bias in Multilevel Data
Hong, G. (2010) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.3102/1076998609359785 · Cited by 130
Wyss, R., Ellis, A. R., Brookhart, M. A., Girman, C. J., Funk, M. J., LoCasale, R. J., & Stürmer, T. (2014) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwu181 · Cited by 119
Franklin, J. M., Eddings, W., Austin, P. C., Stuart, E. A., & Schneeweiß, S. (2017) · PubMed · doi:10.1002/sim.7250 · Cited by 88
Self-citationWyss, R., Girman, C. J., LoCasale, R. J., Brookhart, M. A., & Stürmer, T. (2012) · Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · doi:10.1002/pds.3356 · Cited by 84
Waernbaum, I. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4496 · Cited by 74
Propensity Score Weighting for Causal Inference with Multiple TreatmentsPreprint
Li, F., & Li, F. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1808.05339 · Cited by 9
Desai, R., Wyss, R., Jin, Y.-Z., Bohn, J., Toh, S., Cosgrove, A., Kennedy, A., Kim, J., Kim, C., Ouellet-Hellstrom, R., et al. (2018) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwy130 · Cited by 7
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Desai, 2019, An empirical evaluation of a propensity score stratification based weighting approach in settings of more than two treatment groups, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf, 28, 19
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An introduction to inverse probability of treatment weighting in observational research
Chesnaye, N. C., Stel, V. S., Tripepi, G. L., Dekker, F. W., Fu, E. L., Zoccali, C., & Jager, K. J. (2021) · Clinical Kidney Journal · doi:10.1093/ckj/sfab158 · Cited by 983
Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity
Griffith, G. J., Morris, T. T., Tudball, M. J., Herbert, A., Mancano, G., Pike, L., Sharp, G. C., Sterne, J., Palmer, T. M., Davey Smith, G., et al. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-19478-2 · Cited by 826
Bjørk, M., Zoega, H., Leinonen, M., Cohen, J. M., Dreier, J., Furu, K., Gilhus, N., Gissler, M., Hálfdánarson, Ó. Ö., Igland, J., et al. (2022) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.1269 · Cited by 221
Lund, L. C., Hallas, J., Nielsen, H. I., Koch, A., Mogensen, S. H., Brun, N. C., Christiansen, C. F., Thomsen, R. W., & Pottegård, A. (2021) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(21)00211-5 · Cited by 244
Wu, X., Braun, D., Schwartz, J. D., Kioumourtzoglou, M., & Dominici, F. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba5692 · Cited by 240
Metadata
- Authors
- Desai, R. J., & Franklin, J. M.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Desai, Rishi J
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2019-10-23
- Volume
- 367
- Pages
- l5657
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- OpenAlex
- W2982188023
- Cited by
- 657
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 76 · 2025: 142 · 2024: 117 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 78 · 2020: 26
- FWCI
- 41.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Brigham and Women's Hospital
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- propensity score weighting, confounding adjustment, observational studies, reporting transparency, causal inference
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Research Design, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Survival Rate, Logistic Models, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Propensity Score, Observational Studies as Topic
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
