A Matched Observational Study

Part of the Springer Series in Statistics book series (SSS)


As a prelude to several chapters describing the construction of a matched control group, the current chapter presents an example of a matched observational study as it might (and did) appear in a scientific journal. When reporting a matched observational study, the matching methods are described very briefly in the Methods section. In more detail, the Results section presents tables or figures showing that the matching has been effective in balancing certain observed covariates, so that treated and control groups are comparable with respect to these specific variables. The Results section then compares outcomes in treated and control groups. Because matching has arranged matters to compare ostensibly comparable groups, the comparison of outcomes is often both simpler in form and more detailed in content than it might be if separate adjustments were required for each aspect of each outcome. Treated and control groups that appear comparable in terms of a specific list of measured covariates – groups that are ostensibly comparable – may nonetheless differ in terms of covariates that were not measured. Though not discussed in the current chapter, the important issue of unmeasured covariates in this example is discussed in Part III.


Ovarian Cancer Propensity Score Medical Oncologist Affect Patient Outcome Small Imbalance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Cleveland, W.S.: The Elements of Graphing Data. Summit, NJ: Hobart Press.Google Scholar
  2. Mayer, A.R., Chambers, S.K., Graves, E., et al: Ovarian cancer staging: Does it require a gynecologic oncologist? Gynecol Oncol 47, 223–337 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. McGuire, W.P., Bundy, B., Wenzel, L., et al.: Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 334, 1–6 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Rosenbaum, P.R., Rubin, D.B. : The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70, 41–55 (1983)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Rosenbaum, P.R.: Optimal matching in observational studies. J Am Statist Assoc 84, 1024–1032 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Rosenbaum, P.R., Ross R.N., Silber, J.H.: Minimum distance matched sampling with fine balance in an observational study of treatment for ovarian cancer. J Am Statist Assoc 102, 75–83. (2007)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. O’Brien, P.C., Fleming, T.R.: A paired Prentice-Wilcoxon test for censored paired data. Biometrics 43, 169–180 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Silber, J.H., Rosenbaum, P.R., Polsky, D., Ross, R.N., Even-Shoshan, O., Schwartz, S., Armstrong, K.A., Randall, T.C. : Does ovarian cancer treatment and survival differ by the specialty providing chemotherapy? J Clin Oncol 25, 1169–1175 (2007); related editorial 25, 1157–1159 (2007); related letters and rejoinders 5, 3552–3558 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. Vandenbroucke, J.P. : When are observational studies as credible as randomized trials? Lancet 363, 1728–1731 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Statistics Department Wharton SchoolUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations