Abstract:Background: Longitudinal matching can mitigate confounding in observational, real-world studies of time-dependent treatments. To date, these methods have required iterative, manual re-specifications to achieve covariate balance. We propose a longitudinal extension of genetic matching, a machine learning approach that automates balancing of covariate histories. We examine performance by comparing the proposed extension against baseline propensity score matching and time-dependent propensity score matching. Methods: To evaluate comparative performance, we developed a Monte Carlo simulation framework that reflects a static treatment assigned at multiple time points. Data generation considers a treatment assignment model, a continuous outcome model, and underlying covariates. In simulation, we generated 1,000 datasets, each consisting of 1,000 subjects, and applied: (1) nearest neighbour matching on time-invariant, baseline propensity scores; (2) sequential risk set matching on time-dependent propensity scores; and (3) longitudinal genetic matching on time-dependent covariates. To measure comparative performance, we estimated covariate balance, efficiency, bias, and root mean squared error (RMSE) of treatment effect estimates. In scenario analysis, we varied underlying assumptions for assumed covariate distributions, correlations, treatment assignment models, and outcome models. Results: In all scenarios, baseline propensity score matching resulted in biased effect estimation in the presence of time-dependent confounding, with mean bias ranging from 29.7% to 37.2%. In contrast, time-dependent propensity score matching and longitudinal genetic matching achieved stronger covariate balance and yielded less biased estimation, with mean bias ranging from 0.7% to 13.7%. Across scenarios, longitudinal genetic matching achieved similar or better performance than time-dependent propensity score matching without requiring manual re-specifications or normality of covariates. Conclusions: While the most appropriate longitudinal method will depend on research questions and underlying data patterns, our study can help guide these decisions. Simulation results demonstrate the validity of our longitudinal genetic matching approach for supporting future real-world assessments of treatments accessible at multiple time points.

A comparison of time-varying propensity score vs sequential stratification approaches to longitudinal matching with a time-varying treatment

Genetic matching for time-dependent treatments: a longitudinal extension and simulation study

Covariate-adjusted Survival Analyses in Propensity-Score Matched Samples: Imputing Potential Time-to-event Outcomes.

Propensity score analysis for time-dependent exposure

Matching methods for obtaining survival functions to estimate the effect of a time-dependent treatment

Comparing Propensity Score-Based Methods in Estimating the Treatment Effects: A Simulation Study

Analysis of survival data with non-proportional hazards: A comparison of propensity score weighted methods

Combining Propensity Score Matching with Additional Adjustments for Prognostic Covariates

Propensity Score Analysis With Baseline and Follow-Up Measurements of the Outcome Variable

A propensity score‐integrated approach for leveraging external data in a randomized controlled trial with time‐to‐event endpoints

Treatment Comparisons in Adaptive Platform Trials Adjusting for Temporal Drift

Comparing Covariate Prioritization via Matching to Machine Learning Methods for Causal Inference using Five Empirical Applications

Posterior predictive treatment assignment methods for causal inference in the context of time-varying treatments

Matching Algorithms for Causal Inference with Multiple Treatments

11. Identification and Estimation of Causal Effects with Time-Varying Treatments and Time-Varying Outcomes

Causal Inference using Multivariate Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Models with Longitudinal Data

Adaptive propensity score procedure improves matching in prospective observational trials

Using Propensity Scores to Estimate Effects of Treatment Initiation Decisions: State of the Science

Oversampling and replacement strategies in propensity score matching: a critical review focused on small sample size in clinical settings

Matching Methods for Causal Inference with Time‐Series Cross‐Sectional Data

Evaluation and comparison of covariate balance metrics in studies with time-dependent confounding