Kylie M Lange, Thomas R Sullivan, Jessica Kasza, Lisa N Yelland
{"title":"包括独立数据和配对数据在内的部分聚类试验中连续结果的混合效应模型和广义估计方程的性能。","authors":"Kylie M Lange, Thomas R Sullivan, Jessica Kasza, Lisa N Yelland","doi":"10.1002/sim.10201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many clinical trials involve partially clustered data, where some observations belong to a cluster and others can be considered independent. For example, neonatal trials may include infants from single or multiple births. Sample size and analysis methods for these trials have received limited attention. A simulation study was conducted to (1) assess whether existing power formulas based on generalized estimating equations (GEEs) provide an adequate approximation to the power achieved by mixed effects models, and (2) compare the performance of mixed models vs GEEs in estimating the effect of treatment on a continuous outcome. We considered clusters that exist prior to randomization with a maximum cluster size of 2, three methods of randomizing the clustered observations, and simulated datasets with uninformative cluster size and the sample size required to achieve 80% power according to GEE-based formulas with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The empirical power of the mixed model approach was close to the nominal level when sample size was calculated using the exchangeable GEE formula, but was often too high when the sample size was based on the independence GEE formula. The independence GEE always converged and performed well in all scenarios. Performance of the exchangeable GEE and mixed model was also acceptable under cluster randomization, though under-coverage and inflated type I error rates could occur with other methods of randomization. Analysis of partially clustered trials using GEEs with an independence working correlation structure may be preferred to avoid the limitations of mixed models and exchangeable GEEs.</p>","PeriodicalId":21879,"journal":{"name":"Statistics in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"4819-4835"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of mixed effects models and generalized estimating equations for continuous outcomes in partially clustered trials including both independent and paired data.\",\"authors\":\"Kylie M Lange, Thomas R Sullivan, Jessica Kasza, Lisa N Yelland\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/sim.10201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many clinical trials involve partially clustered data, where some observations belong to a cluster and others can be considered independent. For example, neonatal trials may include infants from single or multiple births. Sample size and analysis methods for these trials have received limited attention. A simulation study was conducted to (1) assess whether existing power formulas based on generalized estimating equations (GEEs) provide an adequate approximation to the power achieved by mixed effects models, and (2) compare the performance of mixed models vs GEEs in estimating the effect of treatment on a continuous outcome. We considered clusters that exist prior to randomization with a maximum cluster size of 2, three methods of randomizing the clustered observations, and simulated datasets with uninformative cluster size and the sample size required to achieve 80% power according to GEE-based formulas with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The empirical power of the mixed model approach was close to the nominal level when sample size was calculated using the exchangeable GEE formula, but was often too high when the sample size was based on the independence GEE formula. The independence GEE always converged and performed well in all scenarios. Performance of the exchangeable GEE and mixed model was also acceptable under cluster randomization, though under-coverage and inflated type I error rates could occur with other methods of randomization. Analysis of partially clustered trials using GEEs with an independence working correlation structure may be preferred to avoid the limitations of mixed models and exchangeable GEEs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Statistics in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4819-4835\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Statistics in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.10201\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.10201","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Performance of mixed effects models and generalized estimating equations for continuous outcomes in partially clustered trials including both independent and paired data.
Many clinical trials involve partially clustered data, where some observations belong to a cluster and others can be considered independent. For example, neonatal trials may include infants from single or multiple births. Sample size and analysis methods for these trials have received limited attention. A simulation study was conducted to (1) assess whether existing power formulas based on generalized estimating equations (GEEs) provide an adequate approximation to the power achieved by mixed effects models, and (2) compare the performance of mixed models vs GEEs in estimating the effect of treatment on a continuous outcome. We considered clusters that exist prior to randomization with a maximum cluster size of 2, three methods of randomizing the clustered observations, and simulated datasets with uninformative cluster size and the sample size required to achieve 80% power according to GEE-based formulas with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The empirical power of the mixed model approach was close to the nominal level when sample size was calculated using the exchangeable GEE formula, but was often too high when the sample size was based on the independence GEE formula. The independence GEE always converged and performed well in all scenarios. Performance of the exchangeable GEE and mixed model was also acceptable under cluster randomization, though under-coverage and inflated type I error rates could occur with other methods of randomization. Analysis of partially clustered trials using GEEs with an independence working correlation structure may be preferred to avoid the limitations of mixed models and exchangeable GEEs.
期刊介绍:
The journal aims to influence practice in medicine and its associated sciences through the publication of papers on statistical and other quantitative methods. Papers will explain new methods and demonstrate their application, preferably through a substantive, real, motivating example or a comprehensive evaluation based on an illustrative example. Alternatively, papers will report on case-studies where creative use or technical generalizations of established methodology is directed towards a substantive application. Reviews of, and tutorials on, general topics relevant to the application of statistics to medicine will also be published. The main criteria for publication are appropriateness of the statistical methods to a particular medical problem and clarity of exposition. Papers with primarily mathematical content will be excluded. The journal aims to enhance communication between statisticians, clinicians and medical researchers.