Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Online

99,00 € / $149.00*

* Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.
Publication Date:
January 2011
ISSN:
1557-4679
DOI:
10.2202/1557-4679.1285

See all formats and pricing

Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 99.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 149.00 *
Print
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 285.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 384.00 *
Print + Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 342.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 461.00 *
*Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.

Ed. by Hubbard, Alan E. / van der Laan, Mark J.

1 Issue per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2011: 1.284

A Tutorial on Methods to Estimating Clinically and Policy-Meaningful Measures of Treatment Effects in Prospective Observational Studies: A Review

Peter C Austin / Andreas Laupacis

1Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences

1St. Michael’s Hospital

Citation Information: The International Journal of Biostatistics. Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages 1–32, ISSN (Online) 1557-4679, DOI: 10.2202/1557-4679.1285, January 2011

Publication History:
Published Online:
2011-01-06

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), treatment assignment is unconfounded with baseline covariates, allowing outcomes to be directly compared between treatment arms. When outcomes are binary, the effect of treatment can be summarized using relative risks, absolute risk reductions and the number needed to treat (NNT). When outcomes are time-to-event in nature, the effect of treatment on the absolute reduction of the risk of an event occurring within a specified duration of follow-up and the associated NNT can be estimated. In observational studies of the effect of treatments on health outcomes, treatment is frequently confounded with baseline covariates. Regression adjustment is commonly used to estimate the adjusted effect of treatment on outcomes. We highlight several limitations of measures of treatment effect that are directly obtained from regression models. We illustrate how both regression-based approaches and propensity-score based approaches allow one to estimate the same measures of treatment effect as those that are commonly reported in RCTs. The CONSORT statement recommends that both relative and absolute measures of treatment effects be reported for RCTs with dichotomous outcomes. The methods described in this paper will allow for similar reporting in observational studies.

Keywords: randomized controlled trials; observational studies; causal effects; treatment effects; absolute risk reduction; relative risk reduction; number needed to treat; odds ratio; survival time; propensity score; propensity-score matching; regression; non-randomized studies; confounding

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.