In this issue of the Journal, Yao and colleagues (1) nicely document the explosive increase in use of propensity score (PS) methods in studies of cancer risk and its treatments. The reporting guidelines they develop can aid authors, reviewers, and editors to enhance the consistency of reports from such studies. However, in their focus on guidelines for PS analysis, they pay limited attention to the fundamental role of the PS in study design and the challenges to valid study design in observational settings. As a complement to their guidelines for reporting PS analysis, Box1 shows some questions related to use of a PS for study design.

中文翻译：

---

使用倾向得分设计观察性比较有效性研究。

在本期《华尔街日报》上，姚及其同事（1）很好地记录了倾向评分（PS）方法在癌症风险及其治疗研究中的爆炸性增长。他们制定的报告指南可以帮助作者，审稿人和编辑提高此类研究报告的一致性。但是，在专注于PS分析指南时，他们很少注意PS在研究设计中的基本作用以及在观察环境中对有效研究设计的挑战。作为对他们报告PS分析的指南的补充，Box1显示了一些与PS用于研究设计有关的问题。