Comparing approaches to causal inference for longitudinal data: Inverse probability weighting versus propensity scores

26Citations
Citations of this article
77Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In observational studies for causal effects, treatments are assigned to experimental units without the benefits of randomization. As a result, there is the potential for bias in the estimation of the treatment effect. Two methods for estimating the causal effect consistently are Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) and the Propensity Score (PS). We demonstrate that in many simple cases, the PS method routinely produces estimators with lower Mean-Square Error (MSE). In the longitudinal setting, estimation of the causal effect of a time-dependent exposure in the presence of time-dependent covariates that are themselves affected by previous treatment also requires adjustment approaches. We describe an alternative approach to the classical binary treatment propensity score termed the Generalized Propensity Score (GPS). Previously, the GPS has mainly been applied in a single interval setting; we use an extension of the GPS approach to the longitudinal setting. We compare the strengths and weaknesses of IPTW and GPS for causal inference in three simulation studies and two real data sets. Again, in simulation, the GPS appears to produce estimators with lower MSE. © 2010 The Berkeley Electronic Press. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ertefaie, A., & Stephens, D. A. (2010). Comparing approaches to causal inference for longitudinal data: Inverse probability weighting versus propensity scores. International Journal of Biostatistics, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.2202/1557-4679.1198

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free