Complexity-Based Propensity Score Model Selection With Stop Criteria

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for evaluating propensity score models in clinical trials are inefficient, consuming excessive computer resources and potentially leading to misinterpretation of results due to the brute force evaluation of all available models.

Innovation Solution

A computer system is configured to sequentially evaluate propensity score models, prioritizing their complexity and applying stop criteria to identify suitable models, thereby reducing resource consumption and improving analysis efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If all available propensity score models are evaluated using brute force method, then comprehensive model selection is achieved, but computer resources (processing utilization, memory utilization, data storage utilization) are excessively consumed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomprehensive model selectionVSAvoidcomputer resources consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the evaluation process by dividing propensity score models into different complexity groups (e.g., simple, moderate, complex). The system evaluates models in sequential batches according to their complexity rather than evaluating all models simultaneously. This segmentation allows the system to identify suitable models at earlier, less resource-intensive stages without compromising the comprehensiveness of model selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by evaluating only a subset of available propensity score models rather than all models. The system uses stop criteria to determine when sufficient models have been evaluated, allowing it to terminate the evaluation process early. This partial evaluation approach maintains reliable model selection while significantly reducing computer resource consumption compared to exhaustive evaluation of all models.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

2Use of energy by moving object

If sequential evaluation with stop criteria is used, then computer resources are reduced, but evaluation time may be extended due to prioritization overhead

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputer resources consumptionVSAvoidevaluation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-categorizing propensity score models into complexity groups before the evaluation process begins. Models are sorted and organized by complexity level in advance, allowing the sequential evaluation to proceed efficiently without requiring complex real-time decisions about which models to evaluate next. This preliminary organization reduces the overhead during the actual evaluation phase.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the evaluation parameter from evaluating all models to evaluating models based on complexity thresholds. The system adjusts evaluation parameters dynamically, stopping when predefined criteria are met (such as finding a sufficient number of suitable models or reaching a maximum complexity level). This parameter-based approach optimizes the balance between resource consumption and evaluation time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If propensity score models are evaluated in order of complexity from least to most complex, then suitable models are identified efficiently, but the system must process and prioritize models which increases operational complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel evaluation efficiencyVSAvoidsystem operation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the operational approach by evaluating models based on complexity parameters rather than evaluating models in arbitrary or random order. The system uses complexity as a sorting parameter, evaluating simpler models first and progressively moving to more complex models. This parameter-based evaluation strategy improves productivity by identifying suitable models faster while maintaining clear, rule-based operational simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250316346A1Computerized system for increasing computational efficiency in evaluation and selecting propensity score models
Publication Date: 2025.10.09 MEDIDATA SOLUTIONS INC
  • US20250316346A1 patent drawing
  • US20250316346A1 patent drawing
  • US20250316346A1 patent drawing

AI summary

In an example method, a computer system accesses first data representing a plurality of characteristics of test subjects, and second data representing a plurality of candidate propensity score models that can be used for estimating an effectiveness of a treatment. The system selects a set of propensity score models by sequentially evaluating at least some of the candidate propensity score models until one or more stop criteria are satisfied. The effectiveness of the treatment can be estimated by utilizing the selected set of propensity score models. Further, the system stores a data structure representing the set of propensity score models, and outputs the data structure.