0
Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Propensity Score Matching ¹æ¹ýÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ °£È£ÁßÀç È¿°ú Æò°¡

The Use of Propensity Score Matching for Evaluation of the Effects of Nursing Interventions

Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing 2007³â 37±Ç 3È£ p.414 ~ 421
KMID : 0806120070370030414
À̼÷Á¤ ( Lee Suk-Jeong ) - Àû½ÊÀÚ°£È£´ëÇÐ

À¯Áö¼ö ( Yoo Ji-Soo ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú
½Å¹Ì°æ ( Shin Mi-Kyung ) - University of Illinois at Chicago Public health
¹Úâ±â ( Park Chang-Gi ) - University of Illinois at Chicago Public health
ÀÌÇöö ( Lee Hyun-Chul ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ÀÇÇаú
ÃÖÀºÁø ( Choi Eun-Jin ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ °£È£´ëÇÐ Á¤Ã¥¿¬±¸¼Ò

Abstract

Background:Nursing intervention studies often suffer from a selection bias introduced by failure of random assignment. Evaluation with selection bias could under or over-estimate any intervention¡¯¡¯s effects. PS matching (PSM) can reduce a selection bias through matching similar Propensity Scores (PS). PS is defined as the conditional probability of being treated given the individual¡¯¡¯s covariates and it can be reused to balance the covariates of two groups.
Purpose:This study was done to assess the significance of PSM as an alternative evaluation method of nursing interventions. Method: An intervention study for patients with some baseline individual characteristic differences between two groups was used for this demonstration. The result of a t-test with PSM was compared with a t-test without matching.
Results:The level of HbA1c at 12 months after baseline was different between the two groups in terms of matching or not.

Conclusions:This study demonstrated the effects of a quasi-random assignment. Evaluation using PSM can reduce a selection bias impact that affects the result of the nursing intervention. Analyzing nursing research more objectively to reduce selection bias using PSM is needed.
KeyWords
°æÇâÁ¡¼ö, ÁßÀç Æò°¡
Propensity score matching, Nursing intervention, Evaluation
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
 
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
SCI(E) MEDLINE ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed