Literature DB >> 11764256

Tests against qualitative interaction: exact critical values and robust tests.

M J Silvapulle1.   

Abstract

Consider a study to evaluate treatment A with a placebo in two or more groups of patients. If treatment A is beneficial to one group of patients and harmful to another, then we say that there is qualitative interaction or crossover interaction between patient groups and the treatments. Gail and Simon (1985, Biometrics 41, 361-372) developed a large-sample procedure for this testing problem. Their test has received favorable coverage in the literature. In this article, we obtain corresponding exact finite sample results for normal error distribution and provide a table of critical values. The test statistic is similar to the familiar F-ratio, and its p-value is equal to a weighted sum of tail areas of F-distributions. The computations to implement this are simple. A simulation study shows that the exact critical values provided here for normal error distribution are preferable to the asymptotic critical values for a wide range of error distributions. We also develop tests that are power robust against long-tailed error distributions. Our robust test uses M-estimators instead of the least squares estimators. We show that the efficiency robustness of the M-estimator translates to power robustness of the corresponding test. Therefore, our robust tests are better if outliers are expected. A simulation study illustrates the substantial power advantages of our robust tests.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11764256     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.01157.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  7 in total

1.  Detecting moderator effects using subgroup analyses.

Authors:  Rui Wang; James H Ware
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2013-04

2.  Variable selection for qualitative interactions in personalized medicine while controlling the family-wise error rate.

Authors:  Lacey Gunter; Ji Zhu; Susan Murphy
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.051

3.  Treatment Heterogeneity and Individual Qualitative Interaction.

Authors:  Robert S Poulson; Gary L Gadbury; David B Allison
Journal:  Am Stat       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 8.710

4.  Evaluating the Effectiveness of Personalized Medicine With Software.

Authors:  Adam Kapelner; Justin Bleich; Alina Levine; Zachary D Cohen; Robert J DeRubeis; Richard Berk
Journal:  Front Big Data       Date:  2021-05-18

5.  Relatively frequent switching of transcription start sites during cerebellar development.

Authors:  Peter Zhang; Emmanuel Dimont; Thomas Ha; Douglas J Swanson; Winston Hide; Dan Goldowitz
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.969

6.  Selecting Optimal Subgroups for Treatment Using Many Covariates.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Alex R Luedtke; Mark J van der Laan; Ronald C Kessler
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  The Interaction Continuum.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 4.822

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.