Literature DB >> 12687651

Choice of test for comparing two groups, with particular application to skewed outcomes.

Ian R White1, Simon G Thompson.   

Abstract

We consider a clinical trial where a skewed outcome variable is to be compared between two groups. While comparison of sample means may lack power, we show that power also depends on the nature of the anticipated treatment effect. For any given distribution in the control arm, there is a family of true distributions in the intervention arm for which the most powerful test is a comparison of arithmetic means. Similar results hold for a comparison of geometric means, and approximately for the Wilcoxon rank sum test and a comparison of medians. We discuss how these methods could be used in planning the analysis of a clinical trial in which the intervention effect alters the shape of the distribution. These ideas are illustrated by a trial in community psychiatry, where the primary outcome (days in hospital) was highly skewed but the intervention was mainly expected to reduce the frequency of values in the tail. We show that a comparison of sample means is a reasonable choice in this case despite the skewness. Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12687651     DOI: 10.1002/sim.1420

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  5 in total

1.  Understanding Causal Distributional and Subgroup Effects With the Instrumental Propensity Score.

Authors:  Jing Cheng; Winston Lin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Inference of Tamoxifen's Effects on Prevention of Breast Cancer from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Yu Shen; Jing Qin; Joseph P Costantino
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2007-12-01       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  Treatment effects for which shift or binary analyses are advantageous in acute stroke trials.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Saver; Jeffrey Gornbein
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2008-12-17       Impact factor: 9.910

4.  Catastrophic healthcare expenditure and coping strategies among patients attending cancer treatment services in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Authors:  Gebremicheal Gebreslassie Kasahun; Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle; Yohannes Hailemichael; Aynalem Abraha Woldemariam; Teferi Gedif Fenta
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 3.295

5.  Sample size and power estimation for studies with health related quality of life outcomes: a comparison of four methods using the SF-36.

Authors:  Stephen J Walters
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-05-25       Impact factor: 3.186

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.