The upcoming meeting, taking place on November 10 at Mila, will explore how we can collectively develop, govern, and deploy high-performing, reliable, and secure agentic systems by connecting academic researchers, industry experts, and practitioners.
We use cookies to analyze the browsing and usage of our website and to personalize your experience. You can disable these technologies at any time, but this may limit certain functionalities of the site. Read our Privacy Policy for more information.
Setting cookies
You can enable and disable the types of cookies you wish to accept. However certain choices you make could affect the services offered on our sites (e.g. suggestions, personalised ads, etc.).
Essential cookies
These cookies are necessary for the operation of the site and cannot be deactivated. (Still active)
Analytics cookies
Do you accept the use of cookies to measure the audience of our sites?
Multimedia Player
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content hosted by our partners (YouTube, etc.)?
BACKGROUND: The generalized propensity score is an extension of the conventional propensity score to settings with a categorical exposure wi… (see more)th more than two levels of treatment or exposure. Six different methods of using the generalized propensity score have been used in the general internal medical literature. However, no studies have evaluated the relative performance of these methods. METHODS: We used Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the performance of seven methods for using the generalized propensity score to estimate the effect of three levels of exposure when outcomes are continuous or binary. We examined estimation of both the average treatment effect and the average treatment effect for the treated. These methods for using the generalized propensity score included: regression and weighting-based approaches proposed by Imbens, regression and weighting-based approaches proposed by McCaffrey, a regression-based approached proposed by Spreeuwenberg, Rubin’s pairwise comparison method, three-way matching, matching weights, and overlap weights. We illustrated the application of these methods by estimating the effect of smoking status (current smoker vs. former smoker vs. never smoker) on death within one year of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction. RESULTS: No method had consistently superior performance across all scenarios and target estimands. CONCLUSION: We make recommendations for the preferred method depending on the nature of the outcome and the target estimand.