» Articles » PMID: 21483818

Weight Trimming and Propensity Score Weighting

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2011 Apr 13
PMID 21483818
Citations 153
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Propensity score weighting is sensitive to model misspecification and outlying weights that can unduly influence results. The authors investigated whether trimming large weights downward can improve the performance of propensity score weighting and whether the benefits of trimming differ by propensity score estimation method. In a simulation study, the authors examined the performance of weight trimming following logistic regression, classification and regression trees (CART), boosted CART, and random forests to estimate propensity score weights. Results indicate that although misspecified logistic regression propensity score models yield increased bias and standard errors, weight trimming following logistic regression can improve the accuracy and precision of final parameter estimates. In contrast, weight trimming did not improve the performance of boosted CART and random forests. The performance of boosted CART and random forests without weight trimming was similar to the best performance obtainable by weight trimmed logistic regression estimated propensity scores. While trimming may be used to optimize propensity score weights estimated using logistic regression, the optimal level of trimming is difficult to determine. These results indicate that although trimming can improve inferences in some settings, in order to consistently improve the performance of propensity score weighting, analysts should focus on the procedures leading to the generation of weights (i.e., proper specification of the propensity score model) rather than relying on ad-hoc methods such as weight trimming.

Citing Articles

Assessing racial disparities in healthcare expenditure using generalized propensity score weighting.

Liu J, Liu Y, Zhou Y, Matsouaka R BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025; 25(1):64.

PMID: 40055609 PMC: 11887195. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-025-02508-2.


Digital technologies and performance incentives: evidence from businesses in the Swiss economy.

Lehmann J, Beckmann M Swiss J Econ Stat. 2025; 161(1):1.

PMID: 39897618 PMC: 11782451. DOI: 10.1186/s41937-024-00132-3.


Effects of conditional cash transfers on tuberculosis incidence and mortality according to race, ethnicity and socioeconomic factors in the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort.

Jesus G, Gestal P, Silva A, Cavalcanti D, Lua I, Ichihara M Nat Med. 2025; 31(2):653-662.

PMID: 39753969 PMC: 11835739. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03381-0.


Effectiveness of dolutegravir-based regimens compared to raltegravir-, elvitegravir-, bictegravir, and darunavir-based regimens among older adults with HIV in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS).

Yan L, Henegar C, Marconi V, Gordon K, Hicks C, Vannappagari V AIDS Res Ther. 2024; 21(1):96.

PMID: 39709467 PMC: 11662819. DOI: 10.1186/s12981-024-00681-w.


Improving Survey Inference Using Administrative Records Without Releasing Individual-Level Continuous Data.

Williams S, Zou J, Liu Y, Si Y, Galea S, Chen Q Stat Med. 2024; 43(30):5803-5813.

PMID: 39557420 PMC: 11639655. DOI: 10.1002/sim.10270.


References
1.
Do D, Finch B . The link between neighborhood poverty and health: context or composition?. Am J Epidemiol. 2008; 168(6):611-9. PMC: 2584357. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn182. View

2.
Brookhart M, Schneeweiss S, Rothman K, Glynn R, Avorn J, Sturmer T . Variable selection for propensity score models. Am J Epidemiol. 2006; 163(12):1149-56. PMC: 1513192. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwj149. View

3.
Tsiatis A, Davidian M . Comment: Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data. Stat Sci. 2008; 22(4):569-573. PMC: 2397555. DOI: 10.1214/07-STS227. View

4.
Cole S, Hernan M . Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models. Am J Epidemiol. 2008; 168(6):656-64. PMC: 2732954. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn164. View

5.
Harder V, Morral A, Arkes J . Marijuana use and depression among adults: Testing for causal associations. Addiction. 2006; 101(10):1463-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01545.x. View