Literature DB >> 20624484

Estimating adjusted NNTs in randomised controlled trials with binary outcomes: a simulation study.

Ralf Bender1, Volker Vervölgyi.   

Abstract

The number needed to treat (NNT) is a popular measure to describe the absolute effect of a new treatment compared with a standard treatment or placebo in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with binary outcome. For applications in epidemiology, the average risk difference (ARD) approach based upon logistic regression was proposed to estimate NNT measures with adjustment for covariates. In the context of cohort studies, averaging is performed separately over the unexposed and the exposed persons to account for possible different exposure effects in the two groups or over the entire sample. In this paper, we apply the ARD approach to estimate adjusted NNTs in RCT settings with balanced covariates where it is adequate to average over the whole sample. It is known that the consequence of adjusting for balanced covariates in logistic regression is on one hand a loss of precision and on the other hand an increased efficiency in testing for treatment effects. However, these results are based upon the investigation of regression coefficients and corresponding odds ratios. By means of simulations we show that the estimation of risk differences and NNTs with adjustment for balanced covariates leads to a gain in precision. A considerable gain in precision is obtained in the case of strong covariate predictors with large variance. Therefore, it is preferable to adjust for balanced covariates in RCTs when the treatment effect is expressed in terms of risk differences and NNTs and the covariate represents a strong predictor. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20624484     DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2010.07.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  3 in total

1.  Understanding clinical trials: emerging methodological issues.

Authors:  Gordon S Doig; Fiona Simpson
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Tighter or less tight glycaemic targets for women with gestational diabetes mellitus for reducing maternal and perinatal morbidity: A stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial.

Authors:  Caroline A Crowther; Deborah Samuel; Ruth Hughes; Thach Tran; Julie Brown; Jane M Alsweiler
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 11.613

3.  The number needed to treat adjusted for explanatory variables in regression and survival analysis: Theory and application.

Authors:  Valentin Vancak; Yair Goldberg; Stephen Z Levine
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 2.497

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.