聚类随机试验的相对风险估计:广义估计方程方法的比较

IF 1.2 4区 数学 International Journal of Biostatistics Pub Date : 2011-05-21 DOI:10.2202/1557-4679.1323
L. Yelland, A. Salter, Philip Ryan
{"title":"聚类随机试验的相对风险估计:广义估计方程方法的比较","authors":"L. Yelland, A. Salter, Philip Ryan","doi":"10.2202/1557-4679.1323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Relative risks have become a popular measure of treatment effect for binary outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relative risks can be estimated directly using log binomial regression but the model may fail to converge. Alternative methods are available for estimating relative risks but these have generally only been evaluated for independent data. As some of these methods are now being applied in cluster RCTs, investigation of their performance in this context is needed. We compare log binomial regression and three alternative methods (expanded logistic regression, log Poisson regression and log normal regression) for estimating relative risks in cluster RCTs. Clustering is taken into account using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The results of our large simulation study show that the log binomial GEE generally performs well for clustered data but suffers from convergence problems, as expected. Both the log Poisson GEE and log normal GEE have advantages in certain settings in terms of type I error, bias and coverage. The expanded logistic GEE can perform poorly and is sensitive to the chosen working correlation structure. Conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment often differ depending on the method used, highlighting the need to pre-specify an analysis approach. We recommend pre-specifying that either the log Poisson GEE or log normal GEE will be used in the event that the log binomial GEE fails to converge.","PeriodicalId":50333,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biostatistics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1557-4679.1323","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relative Risk Estimation in Cluster Randomized Trials: A Comparison of Generalized Estimating Equation Methods\",\"authors\":\"L. Yelland, A. Salter, Philip Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.2202/1557-4679.1323\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Relative risks have become a popular measure of treatment effect for binary outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relative risks can be estimated directly using log binomial regression but the model may fail to converge. Alternative methods are available for estimating relative risks but these have generally only been evaluated for independent data. As some of these methods are now being applied in cluster RCTs, investigation of their performance in this context is needed. We compare log binomial regression and three alternative methods (expanded logistic regression, log Poisson regression and log normal regression) for estimating relative risks in cluster RCTs. Clustering is taken into account using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The results of our large simulation study show that the log binomial GEE generally performs well for clustered data but suffers from convergence problems, as expected. Both the log Poisson GEE and log normal GEE have advantages in certain settings in terms of type I error, bias and coverage. The expanded logistic GEE can perform poorly and is sensitive to the chosen working correlation structure. Conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment often differ depending on the method used, highlighting the need to pre-specify an analysis approach. We recommend pre-specifying that either the log Poisson GEE or log normal GEE will be used in the event that the log binomial GEE fails to converge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Biostatistics\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1557-4679.1323\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Biostatistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2202/1557-4679.1323\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biostatistics","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1557-4679.1323","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

在随机对照试验(rct)中,相对危险度已成为衡量二元结果治疗效果的常用指标。使用对数二项回归可以直接估计相对风险,但模型可能无法收敛。有其他方法可用于估计相对风险,但这些方法通常仅对独立数据进行了评估。由于其中一些方法目前正在集群随机对照试验中应用,因此有必要研究它们在这种情况下的性能。我们比较了对数二项回归和三种替代方法(扩展逻辑回归、对数泊松回归和对数正态回归)在集群随机对照试验中的相对风险估计。使用具有独立或可交换工作关联结构的广义估计方程(GEEs)来考虑聚类。我们的大型模拟研究结果表明,对数二项GEE对于聚类数据通常表现良好,但正如预期的那样存在收敛问题。对数泊松曲线和对数正态曲线在I型误差、偏差和覆盖范围等方面都具有一定的优势。扩展后的逻辑GEE性能较差,且对选择的工作关联结构比较敏感。关于治疗有效性的结论往往因使用的方法而异,这突出了预先指定分析方法的必要性。我们建议在日志二项式GEE不能收敛的情况下,预先指定使用日志泊松GEE或日志正态GEE。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Relative Risk Estimation in Cluster Randomized Trials: A Comparison of Generalized Estimating Equation Methods
Relative risks have become a popular measure of treatment effect for binary outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relative risks can be estimated directly using log binomial regression but the model may fail to converge. Alternative methods are available for estimating relative risks but these have generally only been evaluated for independent data. As some of these methods are now being applied in cluster RCTs, investigation of their performance in this context is needed. We compare log binomial regression and three alternative methods (expanded logistic regression, log Poisson regression and log normal regression) for estimating relative risks in cluster RCTs. Clustering is taken into account using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The results of our large simulation study show that the log binomial GEE generally performs well for clustered data but suffers from convergence problems, as expected. Both the log Poisson GEE and log normal GEE have advantages in certain settings in terms of type I error, bias and coverage. The expanded logistic GEE can perform poorly and is sensitive to the chosen working correlation structure. Conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment often differ depending on the method used, highlighting the need to pre-specify an analysis approach. We recommend pre-specifying that either the log Poisson GEE or log normal GEE will be used in the event that the log binomial GEE fails to converge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Biostatistics
International Journal of Biostatistics Mathematics-Statistics and Probability
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Biostatistics (IJB) seeks to publish new biostatistical models and methods, new statistical theory, as well as original applications of statistical methods, for important practical problems arising from the biological, medical, public health, and agricultural sciences with an emphasis on semiparametric methods. Given many alternatives to publish exist within biostatistics, IJB offers a place to publish for research in biostatistics focusing on modern methods, often based on machine-learning and other data-adaptive methodologies, as well as providing a unique reading experience that compels the author to be explicit about the statistical inference problem addressed by the paper. IJB is intended that the journal cover the entire range of biostatistics, from theoretical advances to relevant and sensible translations of a practical problem into a statistical framework. Electronic publication also allows for data and software code to be appended, and opens the door for reproducible research allowing readers to easily replicate analyses described in a paper. Both original research and review articles will be warmly received, as will articles applying sound statistical methods to practical problems.
期刊最新文献
Hypothesis testing for detecting outlier evaluators. Optimizing personalized treatments for targeted patient populations across multiple domains. History-restricted marginal structural model and latent class growth analysis of treatment trajectories for a time-dependent outcome. Hybrid classical-Bayesian approach to sample size determination for two-arm superiority clinical trials. An interpretable cluster-based logistic regression model, with application to the characterization of response to therapy in severe eosinophilic asthma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1