Propensity scores and the surgeon

• Published in: British journal of surgery Vol. 93; no. 4; pp. 389 - 394
• Main Authors: Adamina, M., Guller, U., Weber, W. P., Oertli, D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01.04.2006; Wiley
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Confounding Factors (Epidemiology); Evidence-Based Medicine; General aspects; General Surgery - standards; Humans; Medical sciences; Outcome Assessment (Health Care); Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Regression Analysis; Medicine; Score; Treatment; Surgery; Surgeon
• ISSN: 0007-1323; 1365-2168
• DOI: 10.1002/bjs.5265

Background: Evidence‐based surgery has been established as a cornerstone of good clinical practice, promising to improve the treatment of patients and the quality of surgical education. However, evidence‐based surgery requires dedicated clinicians trained to perform methodologically sound clinical investigations. Statistical knowledge is therefore invaluable. Surgical studies often cannot be randomized. Propensity scores offer a powerful alternative to multivariable analysis in the assessment of observational, non‐randomized surgical studies. Unfortunately, many surgeons are unaware of this important analytical approach that has gained increasing stature in medical research. Thus, propensity score analyses are not used often in surgical studies. Objective: The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of propensity score analysis, allowing the surgeon to understand the role, advantages and limitations of propensity scores, boosting their development in surgical investigations. Copyright © 2006 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. An under‐appreciated tool