Skip to main content

Table 3 Advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to estimating attributable mortality and length of intensive care unit stay

From: The attributable mortality and length of intensive care unit stay of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients

Method

Advantages

Disadvantages

Crude comparison

Simple

Ignores influence of confounding factors, possibly

  

yielding biased estimates

Matched cohort method

Integrates biologic rationale for matching

May fail to adjust for important confounding factors,

 

patients; can be used in multiple databases;

possibly yielding biased estimates; compared with

 

compared with regression method, avoids bias

regression model, event rate over time is not

 

if event rate is not constant over time

considered

Model-based matched cohort

Analysis customized to the database; compared

Compared with matched cohort method, chance

method

with crude or matched cohort method, more

associations may generate biased estimates due to

 

likely to adjust for important confounding factors;

'overmatching'; compared with regression model,

 

compared with regression method, avoids bias

event rate over time is not considered

 

if event rate is not constant over time

 

Regression method

Analysis customized to the database; uses all

Complex; compared with matched cohort method,

 

patient data; considers patterns of events and

chance associations may generate biased estimates

 

predictors over time and generates most

due to 'overmatching'; biased estimates may also

 

precise estimates if event rate is constant

result if event rate is not constant over time

 

over time

 
  1. The advantages and disadvantages of several approaches to estimating the attributable mortality and length of intensive care unit stay associated with clinically important bleeding are presented (a crude comparison of bleeding and non-bleeding patients, and the three methods used in these analyses).