Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

157
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...
157
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis01:23

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis

38
Mechanistic models are utilized in individual analysis using single-source data, but imperfections arise due to data collection errors, preventing perfect prediction of observed data. The mathematical equation involves known values (Xi), observed concentrations (Ci), measurement errors (εi), model parameters (ϕj), and the related function (ƒi) for i number of values. Different least-squares metrics quantify differences between predicted and observed values. The ordinary least...
38
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

178
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
178
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

125
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,...
125
The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test01:19

The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test

357
The Mantel-Cox log-rank test is a widely used statistical method for comparing the survival distributions of two groups. It tests whether a statistically significant difference exists in survival times between the groups without assuming a specific distribution for the survival data, making it a non-parametric test. This flexibility makes the log-rank test particularly valuable in medical research and other fields where the timing of an event, such as death or disease recurrence, is of...
357
Odds Ratio01:09

Odds Ratio

131
The odds ratio (OR) is a statistical measure used extensively in epidemiology and research to quantify the strength of association between exposure and outcome across different groups. Unlike relative risk, which compares the probabilities of an event occurring, the odds ratio compares the odds of an event occurring in the exposed group to the odds of it occurring in the unexposed group. The odds, in this context, are calculated as the probability of the event happening divided by the...
131

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Sex Differences in Screening for Large Vessel Occlusion and Thrombectomy: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Stroke·2026
Same author

Extending the Median Odds Ratio (MOR), the Interval Odds Ratio (IOR), and the Proportion of Opposed Odds Ratios (POOR) for Use With 3-Level Multilevel Logistic Regression Models.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

Using Propensity Score Weighting With Clustered Data When the Treatment Is Applied at the Level of the Cluster and Outcomes Are Assessed at the Level of the Individual: The Observational Analog of Cluster Randomization Trials.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

The Impact of Two Data-Generating Processes for Competing Risk Data on the Discrimination and Calibration of Two Types of Competing Risk Regression Models.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

Patterns and Outcomes of Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Diabetes and Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Ontario, Canada.

Circulation. Population health and outcomes·2026
Same author

Positive Airway Pressure Therapy Initiation and Continued Benzodiazepine Use Among Chronic Drug Users.

Journal of sleep research·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 28, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.0K

The performance of marginal structural models for estimating risk differences and relative risks using weighted

Peter C Austin1,2,3

  • 1ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Statistical Methods in Medical Research
|April 24, 2024
PubMed
Summary

Marginal structural models (MSMs) and direct weighting yield identical risk estimates in observational studies. For accurate standard error estimation, a bootstrap variance estimator is generally preferred with MSMs, especially in smaller sample sizes.

Keywords:
Inverse probability of treatment weightingbootstrappropensity scorerelative riskrisk differencevariance estimation

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

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

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.5K
Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 28, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.0K
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

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

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.5K
Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.2K

Area of Science:

  • Epidemiology
  • Biostatistics
  • Observational Studies

Background:

  • Estimating causal effects from observational data is crucial for public health.
  • Marginal structural models (MSMs) are a powerful tool for addressing time-varying confounding.
  • Generalized linear models (GLMs) provide a flexible framework for analyzing various outcome types.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance of MSMs using weighted univariate GLMs against direct weighting.
  • To evaluate different propensity score weighting strategies for estimating risk differences and relative risks.
  • To assess the accuracy of robust and bootstrap variance estimators for MSMs.

Main Methods:

  • Monte Carlo simulations were employed to assess model performance.
  • Four propensity score weighting methods were evaluated: IPTW, ATE-T, matching, and overlap weights.
  • Simulations varied sample size (500-10,000) and treatment prevalence (0.1-0.9).
  • Standard errors were estimated using robust and bootstrap variance estimators.

Main Results:

  • MSMs and direct weighting produced identical risk difference and relative risk estimates.
  • Bootstrap variance estimators in MSMs yielded more accurate standard errors, particularly in small to moderate sample sizes.
  • In large sample sizes, bootstrap and direct weighting methods showed similar standard error accuracy.
  • Bootstrap variance estimators are generally preferable to robust estimators for MSMs.

Conclusions:

  • MSMs with weighted univariate GLMs offer a robust approach for causal inference in observational studies.
  • The choice of variance estimator significantly impacts the reliability of effect estimates from MSMs.
  • Bootstrap variance estimators enhance the precision of risk difference and relative risk estimations in MSMs.