Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41992116›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026

A causal inference framework for poststratification: a method for improving external validity in epidemiological studies.

Yeon Woo Oh, Dongkyu Lee, Jaelim Cho, Changsoo Kim, Kyoung-Nam Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 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.

Yeon Woo OhDepartment of Biostatistics and Computing, Yonsei University Graduate School, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-2485-1400
Dongkyu LeeDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9093-3696
Jaelim ChoDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4524-0310
Changsoo KimDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5940-5649
Kyoung-Nam KimDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea. kknload@yuhs.ac.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4889-3069

Funding

Korea Environmental Industry and Technology Institute 2022003310009National Research Foundation of Korea 2022R1C1C1004772
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoststratification, a method for improving the representativeness of nonprobability samples, has developed primarily within survey methodology. Meanwhile, g-methods such as inverse probability weighting (IPW) and standardization have been developed in epidemiology for causal inference from observational data. Despite evolving under different terminology in two fields, these methods share similar underlying assumptions and estimation strategies. In this article, we systematically articulate the formal connections between poststratification and g-methods, demonstrating how each field can inform the other.

methodsWe develop a methodological framework demonstrating how poststratification can be understood through established causal inference principles. We formally map the three core assumptions required for valid poststratification onto the identifiability conditions used in causal inference from observational data. We show that the two principal implementation approaches for poststratification parallel inverse probability weighting and standardization. To illustrate the practical application, we apply poststratification to data from the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study (KoGES) of 10,030 Korean adults aged 40–69 years in 2001, adjusting for age and sex distributions to estimate population-level smoking prevalence.

resultsThe formal mapping reveals that poststratification and g-methods share analogous assumptions and estimation strategies. This parallel provides principled guidance for auxiliary variable selection, clarifies when poststratification succeeds or fails, and enables application of established diagnostic tools from causal inference to poststratification problems. In the KoGES example, poststratification adjusted the crude smoking prevalence from 25.7% to 26.5%, accounting for oversampling of older participants.

conclusionsUnderstanding poststratification through the lens of causal inference offers a rigorous foundation for making valid population-level inferences from nonprobability samples. This framework facilitates cross-disciplinary learning and enables more principled interpretation of results from convenience samples, cohort studies, and other nonprobability sampling designs. Future work could explore how poststratification methods relate to the broader literature on generalizability and transportability of results from randomized trials.

Indexed as

CausalityEpidemiologic StudiesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalProbabilityReproducibility of ResultsRepublic of KoreaSmokingCausal inferenceEpidemiologyExternal validityInverse probability weightingStandardization

Identifiers

PMID41992116
PMCPMC13220569

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.