Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...

Relative Risk

Relative Risk

Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This phenomenon...

Weighted Mean

Weighted Mean

While taking the arithmetic, geometric, or harmonic mean of a sample data set, equal importance is assigned to all the data points. However, all the values may not always be equally important in some data sets. An intrinsic bias might make it more important to give more weightage to specific values over others.
For example, consider the number of goals scored in the matches of a tournament. While computing the average number of goals scored in the tournament, it may be more important to...

Hazard Ratio

Hazard Ratio

The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Immediate level change estimates can be biased when interrupted time series analyses aggregate over time using segmented linear regression.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026

Same author

Peer advocacy for people experiencing homelessness in London: a comprehensive synopsis of a mixed-method study including economic and process evaluation.

Public health research (Southampton, England)·2026

Same author

CRT-Estimands Framework: consensus based extension of the ICH E9(R1) addendum for cluster randomised trials.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2026

Same author

Additional crossovers in cluster randomised crossover trials do not always increase statistical power.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026

Same author

Comparing meta-analysis and linear mixed model-based approaches for the analysis of continuous outcomes from batched stepped wedge trials.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026

Same author

Repeated inclusion cluster randomized trials: a new class of designs for assessing group-level interventions.

Biometrics·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 5, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Confounder-adjusted estimates of the risk difference using propensity score-based weighting.

Obioha C Ukoumunne¹, Elizabeth Williamson, Andrew B Forbes

¹Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia. obioha.ukoumunne@mcri.edu.au

Statistics in Medicine

|December 21, 2010

Summary

This study shows that propensity score weighting effectively estimates risk differences, even with complex confounders. The method performs well with large sample sizes and good overlap in propensity scores.

More Related Videos

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 5, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

Area of Science:

Epidemiology
Biostatistics
Health Research Methods

Background:

Direct regression adjustment for confounders is challenging for risk difference estimation.
Propensity score methods offer an alternative for adjusting confounder effects.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the performance of a propensity score-based method using inverse probability-of-exposure weights for estimating confounder-adjusted risk differences.
To assess the impact of confounding strength and sample size on the accuracy and coverage of this method.

Main Methods:

A simulation study was conducted using logistic models for exposure and disease status.
Incorporated binary and normally distributed confounders with varying odds ratios.
Employed inverse probability-of-exposure weighting to balance confounders between exposed and non-exposed groups.

Main Results:

The propensity score weighting method demonstrated low absolute bias (less than 1 percentage point in most cases) in risk difference estimation.
Confidence interval coverage was generally nominal (95%), but decreased under strong confounding (odds ratios of 5).
Favorable performance was linked to good overlap in propensity score distributions and larger sample sizes.

Conclusions:

Propensity score weighting is a viable method for estimating confounder-adjusted risk differences.
Adequate sample size and sufficient overlap in propensity scores are crucial for reliable results.
The method's performance is robust but can be compromised by strong confounding effects.