Likelihood estimate of treatment effects under selection bias

We consider methods for estimating causal effects of treatment in the situation where the individuals in the treatment and the control group are self selected, i.e., the selection mechanism is not randomized. In this case, simple comparison of treated and control outcomes will not generally yield valid estimates of casual effects. The propensity score method is frequently used for the evaluation of treatment effect. However, this method is based onsome strong assumptions, which are not directly testable. In this paper, we present an alternative modeling approachto draw causal inference by using share random-effect model and the computational algorithm to draw likelihood based inference with such a model. With small numerical studies and a real data analysis, we show that our approach gives not only more efficient estimates but it is also less sensitive to model misspecifications, which we consider, than the existing methods.

Comparison of treatment of incomplete abortion with misoprostol by physicians and midwives at district level in Uganda : a randomised controlled equivalence trial

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol is established for the treatment of incomplete abortion but has not been systematically assessed when provided by midwives at district level in a low-resource setting. We investigated the effectiveness and safety of midwives diagnosing and treating incomplete abortion with misoprostol, compared with physicians. METHODS: We did a multicentre randomised controlled equivalence trial at district level at six facilities in Uganda. Eligibility criteria were women with signs of incomplete abortion. We randomly allocated women with first-trimester incomplete abortion to clinical assessment and treatment with misoprostol either by a physician or a midwife. The randomisation (1:1) was done in blocks of 12 and was stratified for study site. Primary outcome was complete abortion not needing surgical intervention within 14-28 days after initial treatment. The study was not masked. Analysis of the primary outcome was done on the per-protocol population with a generalised linear-mixed effects model. The predefined equivalence range was -4% to 4%. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01844024. FINDINGS: From April 30, 2013, to July 21, 2014, 1108 women were assessed for eligibility. 1010 women were randomly assigned to each group (506 to midwife group and 504 to physician group). 955 women (472 in the midwife group and 483 in the physician group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. 452 (95·8%) of women in the midwife group had complete abortion and 467 (96·7%) in the physician group. The model-based risk difference for midwife versus physician group was -0·8% (95% CI -2·9 to 1·4), falling within the predefined equivalence range (-4% to 4%). The overall proportion of women with incomplete abortion was 3·8% (36/955), similarly distributed between the two groups (4·2% [20/472] in the midwife group, 3·3% [16/483] in the physician group). No serious adverse events were recorded. INTERPRETATION: Diagnosis and treatment of incomplete abortion with misoprostol by midwives is equally safe and effective as when provided by physicians, in a low-resource setting. Scaling up midwives' involvement in treatment of incomplete abortion with misoprostol at district level would increase access to safe post-abortion care. FUNDING: The Swedish Research Council, Karolinska Institutet, and Dalarna University.

Evaluation of surface treatment techniques for polypropylene andimplementation of a method for testing ink adhesion

If a plastic material is used as a print bearer there are a need of a special surface treatment to get agod and durable printing. The most used surface treatment technique for the moment is coronatreatment. This kind of treatment has unfortunately showed not to be so durable in the long term.Plasma treatment which in this case uses different kind of gases in the treatment of polypropyleneis shown as a more effective treatment in this project. When the plasma treated surface has beenprinted is the good quality last much longer and the adhesion between the ink and the surface isremained. To test this adhesion is for the moment a standard used (ASTM D3359). This standardhas appeared unstable and dependent at many different factors, which gives a big variation in thetest results. Because of this has new test methods been carried out to give a more even and morereliable result in the test of the adhesion.