Causal inference via propensity scores for case-control studies
病例对照研究中基于倾向得分的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要围绕病例对照抽样中的混杂调整、倾向得分与因果相对效应估计。
病例对照研究中基于倾向得分的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Propensity score methods for causal inference are increasingly being used in cohort and experimental designs, but their development and uptake in outcome-dependent sampling schemes, such as case-control studies, remains limited. Case-control studies involve the sampling of individuals with and without an outcome of interest with the goal of estimating the effects of past exposures. When the design is observational, statistical adjustment for confounding bias is necessary. In case-control studies, propensity score models can be fit using control data under the assumption that the controls are representative of the source population with respect to their exposure distribution conditional on covariates ("control exchangeability"). In this paper, we first demonstrate that relative effects, such as causal risk ratios, are estimable under three different case-control design variants using control-fitted propensity scores. We appropriate two existing estimators for these designs: inverse probability of treatment weighting and an efficient and doubly robust estimator. We also introduce a novel two-step propensity score caliper-matching procedure for case-control designs. We introduce novel diagnostic tools to verify two necessary types of overlap. We then contrast our estimators using simulated data and apply them to examine the association between regular aspirin use and ovarian cancer risk.