Cargando…
Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam
OBJECTIVES: Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR) is a multi-sectoral approach working to equalise opportunities and include people with disabilities in all aspects of life. The complexity of CBR and often limited resources lead to challenges when attempting to quantify its effectiveness, with random...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6361336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30782679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022544 |
_version_ | 1783392672959954944 |
---|---|
author | Mason, Catherine Sabariego, Carla Thắng, Đoàn Mạnh Weber, Jörg |
author_facet | Mason, Catherine Sabariego, Carla Thắng, Đoàn Mạnh Weber, Jörg |
author_sort | Mason, Catherine |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR) is a multi-sectoral approach working to equalise opportunities and include people with disabilities in all aspects of life. The complexity of CBR and often limited resources lead to challenges when attempting to quantify its effectiveness, with randomisation and longitudinal data rarely possible. Statistical methods, such as propensity score matching (PSM), offer an alternative approach to evaluate a treatment when randomisation is not feasible. The aim of this study is to examine whether PSM can be an effective method to facilitate evaluations of results in CBR when data are cross-sectional. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected using the WHO’s CBR Indicators in Vietnam, with treatment assignment (participating in CBR or not) determined by province of residence. 298 participants were selected through government records. RESULTS: PSM was conducted using one-to-one nearest neighbour method on 10 covariates. In the unmatched sample, significant differences between groups were found for six of the 10 covariates. PSM successfully adjusted for bias in all covariates in the matched sample (74 matched pairs). A paired t-test compared the outcome of ‘community inclusion’ (a score based on selected indicators) between CBR and non-CBR participants for both the matched and unmatched samples, with CBR participants found to have significantly worse community inclusion scores (mean=17.86, SD=6.30, 95% CI 16.45 to 19.32) than non-CBR participants (mean=20.93, SD=6.16, 95% CI 19.50 to 22.35); t(73)=3.068, p=0.001. This result did not differ between the matched and unmatched samples. CONCLUSION: PSM successfully reduced bias between groups, though its application did not affect the tested outcome. PSM should be considered when analysing cross-sectional CBR data, especially for international comparisons where differences between populations may be greater. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6361336 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63613362019-03-10 Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam Mason, Catherine Sabariego, Carla Thắng, Đoàn Mạnh Weber, Jörg BMJ Open Epidemiology OBJECTIVES: Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR) is a multi-sectoral approach working to equalise opportunities and include people with disabilities in all aspects of life. The complexity of CBR and often limited resources lead to challenges when attempting to quantify its effectiveness, with randomisation and longitudinal data rarely possible. Statistical methods, such as propensity score matching (PSM), offer an alternative approach to evaluate a treatment when randomisation is not feasible. The aim of this study is to examine whether PSM can be an effective method to facilitate evaluations of results in CBR when data are cross-sectional. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected using the WHO’s CBR Indicators in Vietnam, with treatment assignment (participating in CBR or not) determined by province of residence. 298 participants were selected through government records. RESULTS: PSM was conducted using one-to-one nearest neighbour method on 10 covariates. In the unmatched sample, significant differences between groups were found for six of the 10 covariates. PSM successfully adjusted for bias in all covariates in the matched sample (74 matched pairs). A paired t-test compared the outcome of ‘community inclusion’ (a score based on selected indicators) between CBR and non-CBR participants for both the matched and unmatched samples, with CBR participants found to have significantly worse community inclusion scores (mean=17.86, SD=6.30, 95% CI 16.45 to 19.32) than non-CBR participants (mean=20.93, SD=6.16, 95% CI 19.50 to 22.35); t(73)=3.068, p=0.001. This result did not differ between the matched and unmatched samples. CONCLUSION: PSM successfully reduced bias between groups, though its application did not affect the tested outcome. PSM should be considered when analysing cross-sectional CBR data, especially for international comparisons where differences between populations may be greater. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6361336/ /pubmed/30782679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022544 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Epidemiology Mason, Catherine Sabariego, Carla Thắng, Đoàn Mạnh Weber, Jörg Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title | Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title_full | Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title_fullStr | Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title_full_unstemmed | Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title_short | Can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate Community-Based Rehabilitation? Results of a survey implementing the WHO’s Community-Based Rehabilitation indicators in Vietnam |
title_sort | can propensity score matching be applied to cross-sectional data to evaluate community-based rehabilitation? results of a survey implementing the who’s community-based rehabilitation indicators in vietnam |
topic | Epidemiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6361336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30782679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022544 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT masoncatherine canpropensityscorematchingbeappliedtocrosssectionaldatatoevaluatecommunitybasedrehabilitationresultsofasurveyimplementingthewhoscommunitybasedrehabilitationindicatorsinvietnam AT sabariegocarla canpropensityscorematchingbeappliedtocrosssectionaldatatoevaluatecommunitybasedrehabilitationresultsofasurveyimplementingthewhoscommunitybasedrehabilitationindicatorsinvietnam AT thangđoanmanh canpropensityscorematchingbeappliedtocrosssectionaldatatoevaluatecommunitybasedrehabilitationresultsofasurveyimplementingthewhoscommunitybasedrehabilitationindicatorsinvietnam AT weberjorg canpropensityscorematchingbeappliedtocrosssectionaldatatoevaluatecommunitybasedrehabilitationresultsofasurveyimplementingthewhoscommunitybasedrehabilitationindicatorsinvietnam |