Cargando…

Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data

Background: Propensity score (PS) methods are frequently used within economic evaluations based on nonrandomized data to adjust for measured confounders, but many researchers omit the fact that they cannot adjust for unmeasured confounders. Objective: To illustrate how confounding due to unmeasured...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guertin, Jason R., Bowen, James M., De Rose, Guy, O’Reilly, Daria J., Tarride, Jean-Eric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6124939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30288418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468317697711
_version_ 1783353106690473984
author Guertin, Jason R.
Bowen, James M.
De Rose, Guy
O’Reilly, Daria J.
Tarride, Jean-Eric
author_facet Guertin, Jason R.
Bowen, James M.
De Rose, Guy
O’Reilly, Daria J.
Tarride, Jean-Eric
author_sort Guertin, Jason R.
collection PubMed
description Background: Propensity score (PS) methods are frequently used within economic evaluations based on nonrandomized data to adjust for measured confounders, but many researchers omit the fact that they cannot adjust for unmeasured confounders. Objective: To illustrate how confounding due to unmeasured confounders can bias an economic evaluation despite PS matching. Methods: We used data from a previously published nonrandomized study to select a prematched population consisting of 121 patients (46.5%) who received endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and 139 patients (53.5%) who received open surgical repair (OSR), in which sufficient data regarding eight measured confounders were available. One-to-one PS matching was used within this population to select two PS-matched subpopulations. The Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation was selected by matching patients using a PS model that omitted patients’ smoking status (one of the measured confounders), whereas the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation was selected by matching patients using a PS model that included all eight measured confounders. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed within both subpopulations. Results: Both subpopulations were composed of two different sets of 164 patients. Balance within the Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation was achieved on all confounders except for patients’ smoking status, whereas balance within the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation was achieved on all confounders. Results indicated that the ICER of EVAR over OSR differed between both subpopulations; the ICER was estimated at $157,909 per life-year gained (LYG) within the Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation, while it was estimated at $235,074 per LYG within the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation. Discussion: Although effective in controlling for measured confounding, PS matching may not adjust for unmeasured confounders that may bias the results of an economic evaluation based on nonrandomized data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6124939
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61249392018-10-04 Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data Guertin, Jason R. Bowen, James M. De Rose, Guy O’Reilly, Daria J. Tarride, Jean-Eric MDM Policy Pract Original Article Background: Propensity score (PS) methods are frequently used within economic evaluations based on nonrandomized data to adjust for measured confounders, but many researchers omit the fact that they cannot adjust for unmeasured confounders. Objective: To illustrate how confounding due to unmeasured confounders can bias an economic evaluation despite PS matching. Methods: We used data from a previously published nonrandomized study to select a prematched population consisting of 121 patients (46.5%) who received endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and 139 patients (53.5%) who received open surgical repair (OSR), in which sufficient data regarding eight measured confounders were available. One-to-one PS matching was used within this population to select two PS-matched subpopulations. The Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation was selected by matching patients using a PS model that omitted patients’ smoking status (one of the measured confounders), whereas the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation was selected by matching patients using a PS model that included all eight measured confounders. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed within both subpopulations. Results: Both subpopulations were composed of two different sets of 164 patients. Balance within the Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation was achieved on all confounders except for patients’ smoking status, whereas balance within the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation was achieved on all confounders. Results indicated that the ICER of EVAR over OSR differed between both subpopulations; the ICER was estimated at $157,909 per life-year gained (LYG) within the Matched PS-Smoking Excluded Subpopulation, while it was estimated at $235,074 per LYG within the Matched PS-Smoking Included Subpopulation. Discussion: Although effective in controlling for measured confounding, PS matching may not adjust for unmeasured confounders that may bias the results of an economic evaluation based on nonrandomized data. SAGE Publications 2017-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6124939/ /pubmed/30288418 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468317697711 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Guertin, Jason R.
Bowen, James M.
De Rose, Guy
O’Reilly, Daria J.
Tarride, Jean-Eric
Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title_full Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title_fullStr Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title_full_unstemmed Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title_short Illustration of the Impact of Unmeasured Confounding Within an Economic Evaluation Based on Nonrandomized Data
title_sort illustration of the impact of unmeasured confounding within an economic evaluation based on nonrandomized data
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6124939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30288418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468317697711
work_keys_str_mv AT guertinjasonr illustrationoftheimpactofunmeasuredconfoundingwithinaneconomicevaluationbasedonnonrandomizeddata
AT bowenjamesm illustrationoftheimpactofunmeasuredconfoundingwithinaneconomicevaluationbasedonnonrandomizeddata
AT deroseguy illustrationoftheimpactofunmeasuredconfoundingwithinaneconomicevaluationbasedonnonrandomizeddata
AT oreillydariaj illustrationoftheimpactofunmeasuredconfoundingwithinaneconomicevaluationbasedonnonrandomizeddata
AT tarridejeaneric illustrationoftheimpactofunmeasuredconfoundingwithinaneconomicevaluationbasedonnonrandomizeddata