G2TT
来源类型Publication
Analytical Methods for a Learning Health System: 3. Analysis of Observational Studies
Michael Stoto; Michael Oakes; Elizabeth Stuart; Randall Brown; Jelena Zurovac; and Elisa L. Priest
发表日期2017-12-07
出版者eGEMs, vol. 5, no. 1
出版年2017
语种英语
概述The third paper in a series on how learning health systems can use routinely collected electronic health data (EHD) to advance knowledge and support continuous learning, this review describes how analytical methods for individual-level electronic health data EHD, including regression approaches, interrupted time series (ITS) analyses, instrumental variables, and propensity score methods, can also be used to address the question of whether the intervention “works.”",
摘要

The third paper in a series on how learning health systems can use routinely collected electronic health data (EHD) to advance knowledge and support continuous learning, this review describes how analytical methods for individual-level electronic health data EHD, including regression approaches, interrupted time series (ITS) analyses, instrumental variables, and propensity score methods, can also be used to address the question of whether the intervention “works.”

The two major potential sources of bias in non-experimental studies of health care interventions are that the treatment groups compared do not have the same probability of treatment or exposure and the potential for confounding by unmeasured covariates. Although very different, the approaches presented in this chapter are all based on assumptions about data, causal relationships, and biases. For instance, regression approaches assume that the relationship between the treatment, outcome, and other variables is properly specified, all of the variables are available for analysis (i.e., no unobserved confounders) and measured without error, and that the error term is independent and identically distributed. The instrumental variables approach requires identifying an instrument that is related to the assignment of treatment but otherwise has no direct on the outcome. Propensity score methods approaches, on the other hand, assume that there are no unobserved confounders. The epidemiological designs discussed also make assumptions, for instance that individuals can serve as their own control.

To properly address these assumptions, analysts should conduct sensitivity analyses within the assumptions of each method to assess the potential impact of what cannot be observed. Researchers also should analyze the same data with different analytical approaches that make alternative assumptions, and to apply the same methods to different data sets. Finally, different analytical methods, each subject to different biases, should be used in combination and together with different designs, to limit the potential for bias in the final results.

URLhttps://www.mathematica.org/our-publications-and-findings/publications/analytical-methods-for-a-learning-health-system-3-analysis-of-observational-studies
来源智库Mathematica Policy Research (United States)
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/489094
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Michael Stoto,Michael Oakes,Elizabeth Stuart,et al. Analytical Methods for a Learning Health System: 3. Analysis of Observational Studies. 2017.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Michael Stoto]的文章
[Michael Oakes]的文章
[Elizabeth Stuart]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Michael Stoto]的文章
[Michael Oakes]的文章
[Elizabeth Stuart]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Michael Stoto]的文章
[Michael Oakes]的文章
[Elizabeth Stuart]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。