Squeezing observational data for better causal inference: Methods and examples for prevention research.

Clicks: 303
ID: 103382
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #17 of 193 articles by views in international journal of psychology : journal international de psychologie

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 193 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are typically viewed as the gold standard for causal inference. This is because effects of interest can be identified with the fewest assumptions, especially imbalance in background characteristics. Yet because conducting RCTs are expensive, time consuming and sometimes unethical, observational studies are frequently used to study causal associations. In these studies, imbalance, or confounding, is usually controlled with multiple regression, which entails strong assumptions. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe strengths and weaknesses of several methods to control for confounding in observational studies, and to demonstrate their use in cross-sectional dataset that use patient registration data from the Juan Pablo II Primary Care Clinic in La Pintana-Chile. The dataset contains responses from 5855 families who provided complete information on family socio-demographics, family functioning and health problems among their family members. We employ regression adjustment, stratification, restriction, matching, propensity score matching, standardisation and inverse probability weighting to illustrate the approaches to better causal inference in non-experimental data and compare results. By applying study design and data analysis techniques that control for confounding in different ways than regression adjustment, researchers may strengthen the scientific relevance of observational studies.
Reference Key
garciahuidobro2017squeezinginternational Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Garcia-Huidobro, Diego;Michael Oakes, J;
Journal international journal of psychology : journal international de psychologie
Year 2017
DOI
10.1002/ijop.12275
URL
Keywords
methodology causal inference methods observational studies randomised trials

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.