Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 21, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Comparison of the ability of double-robust estimators to correct bias in propensity score matching analysis. A Monte
Tri-Long Nguyen1,2,3,4, Gary S Collins5, Jessica Spence2,3,4
1Laboratory of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Clinical Research and Health Economics, EA2415, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France.
Objective:
As covariates are not always adequately balanced after propensity score matching and double- adjustment can be used to remove residual confounding, we compared the performance of several double-robust estimators in different scenarios.
Methods:
We conducted a series of Monte Carlo simulations on virtual observational studies. After estimating the propensity scores by logistic regression, we performed 1:1 optimal, nearest-neighbor, and caliper matching. We used 4 estimators on each matched sample: (1) a crude estimator without double-adjustment, (2) double-adjustment for the propensity scores, (3) double-adjustment for the unweighted unbalanced covariates, and (4) double-adjustment for the unbalanced covariates, weighted by their strength of association with the outcome.
Results:
The crude estimator led to highest bias in all tested scenarios. Double-adjustment for the propensity scores effectively removed confounding only when the propensity score models were correctly specified. Double-adjustment for the unbalanced covariates was more robust to misspecification. Double-adjustment for the weighted unbalanced covariates outperformed the other approaches in every scenario and using any matching algorithm, as measured by the mean squared error.
Conclusion:
Double-adjustment can be used to remove residual confounding after propensity score matching. The unbalanced covariates with the strongest confounding effects should be adjusted.
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance,...
Goodness-of-Fit Test
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Statistical Methods to Analyze Parametric Data: Student t-Test and Goodness-of-Fit Test
The Student's t-test is a statistical test that examines if there is a statistically significant difference between the means of two groups. This test is instrumental when dealing with...
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

