Document Detail


Power comparison of summary measure, mixed model, and survival analysis methods for analysis of repeated-measures trials.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22416838     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Data-Review    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
In two-group repeated-measures studies, a traditional statistical approach is to base analysis directly on the observed continuous measurements, using either summary measures or a mixed linear model. In some medical studies, however, an alternate approach has been taken: Declare the occurrence of an "event" when the sequence of measurements crosses a prespecified threshold, and compare the groups with respect to time to event using the log-rank test. This approach is appealing to clinicians, but clearly involves a loss of information and therefore statistical efficiency. The aim of this article is to quantify the degree of power loss in the context of the random line model. We also compare the summary measures approach to the random line approach. In regard to the efficiency loss with the survival analysis approach, we find that the loss ranges, depending on the location of the threshold, from moderate to dramatic. Using an optimally weighted log-rank test in place of the standard log-rank test leads to minimal gain in efficiency. In regard to analysis based on the original continuous measurements, for testing the slope a weighted summary measure appears to be the best overall choice, whereas for testing the intercept the maximum likelihood (ML) approach is typically much more efficient than the summary measures approach, although the efficiency of the ML approach can be compromised in studies with a small number of observation timepoints. These results have obvious implications for the choice of study design and analysis.
Authors:
David M Zucker; Orly Manor; Yury Gubman
Related Documents :
22496108 - Utility-based generation of referring expressions.
22804678 - Assessing personality in the dsm-5: the utility of bipolar constructs.
21974208 - Nasal spectra for forensic voice comparison.
22608108 - Calculating an intervention's (cost-)effectiveness for the real-world target population...
20397908 - Modeling the evolution of phenotypic plasticity in resource allocation in wing-dimorphi...
15359198 - An artificial neural network ensemble to predict disposition and length of stay in chil...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics     Volume:  22     ISSN:  1520-5711     ISO Abbreviation:  J Biopharm Stat     Publication Date:  2012 May 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-03-15     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9200436     Medline TA:  J Biopharm Stat     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  519-34     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
a Department of Statistics , Hebrew University , Mount Scopus , Jerusalem , Israel.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  A novel method for assessing in vitro oncology drug combinations using growth rates.
Next Document:  Assessing interactions for fixed-dose drug combinations in tumor xenograft studies.