Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41743487›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Evaluating the sampling effect of propensity score matching for reducing selection bias in medical data.

Minji Roh, Sujin Yum, Gihun Joo, Jae-Won Jang, Hyeonseung Im

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Minji RohInterdisciplinary Graduate Program in Medical Bigdata Convergence, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.
Sujin YumInterdisciplinary Graduate Program in Medical Bigdata Convergence, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.
Gihun JooKangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.
Jae-Won JangDepartment of Neurology, Kangwon National University Hospital, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.
Hyeonseung ImDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In real-world medical data, selection bias can significantly impact the performance of machine learning models, potentially leading to distorted outcomes. However, research aimed at mitigating selection bias remains relatively limited. Methods: In this study, we evaluate the effectiveness of Propensity Score Matching (PSM) in reducing selection bias and assessing its impact on classification performance in imbalanced medical data. Specifically, we apply PSM alongside five undersampling, three oversampling, and three hybrid sampling techniques to three medical datasets: rapidly progressive dementia prediction (ADNI, Results: The results indicate that PSM reduces SMD within the dataset, maintains stable classification performance, and enhances the internal validity of the model under conditions of limited or moderate demographic imbalance. Conclusion: These advantages suggest its potential for improving model reliability and facilitating better generalization to external datasets in real-world medical applications. However, in datasets with extreme selection bias or when overly restrictive matching is applied, PSM can degrade model performance, underscoring the importance of choosing strategies that account for dataset characteristics.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPropensity ScoreCardiovascular DiseasesDementiaHumansHypothyroidismSelection Biasimbalanced datamachine learningmedical data analysispropensity score matchingselection bias

Identifiers

PMID41743487
PMCPMC12929392

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.