Literature DB >> 23486929

Relative Efficiency of Unequal Versus Equal Cluster Sizes for the Nonparametric Weighted Sign Test Estimators in Clustered Binary Data.

Chul Ahn1, Fan Hu, Seung-Chun Lee.   

Abstract

We consider analysis of clustered binary data from multiple observations for each subject in which any two observations from a subject are assumed to have a common correlation coefficient. In the weighted sign test on proportion in clustered binary data, three weighting schemes are considered: equal weights to observations, equal weights to clusters and the optimal weights that minimize the variance of the estimator. Since the distribution of cluster sizes may not be exactly specified before the trial starts, the sample size is usually determined using an average cluster size without taking into account any potential imbalance in cluster size even though cluster size usually varies among clusters. In this paper we investigate the relative efficiency (RE) of unequal versus equal cluster sizes for clustered binary data using the weighted sign test estimators. The REs are computed as a function of correlation among observations within each subject and the various cluster size distributions. The required sample size for unequal cluster sizes will not exceed the sample size for an equal cluster size multiplied by the maximum RE. It is concluded that the maximum RE for various cluster size distributions considered here does not exceed 1.50, 1.61 and 1.12 for equal weights to observations, equal weights to clusters and optimal weights, respectively. It suggests sampling 50%, 61% and 12% more clusters depending on the weighting schemes than the number of clusters computed using an average cluster size.

Entities:  

Keywords:  intraclass correlation coefficient; sample size; variable cluster sizes

Year:  2012        PMID: 23486929      PMCID: PMC3593313          DOI: 10.1177/0092861512449818

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Inf J        ISSN: 0092-8615


  8 in total

1.  Estimating intraclass correlation for binary data.

Authors:  M S Ridout; C G Demétrio; D Firth
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Nonparametric Sample Size Estimation for Sensitivity and Specificity with Multiple Observations per Subject.

Authors:  Fan Hu; William R Schucany; Chul Ahn
Journal:  Drug Inf J       Date:  2010

3.  A signed-rank test for clustered data.

Authors:  Somnath Datta; Glen A Satten
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Sample size adjustments for varying cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes analyzed with second-order PQL mixed logistic regression.

Authors:  Math J J M Candel; Gerard J P Van Breukelen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Sample Size Calculation for Clustered Binary Data with Sign Tests Using Different Weighting Schemes.

Authors:  Chul Ahn; Fan Hu; William R Schucany
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 1.452

6.  Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of site-specific diagnostic tests.

Authors:  P P Hujoel; L H Moulton; W J Loesche
Journal:  J Periodontal Res       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 4.419

7.  The use of a correlated binomial model for the analysis of certain toxicological experiments.

Authors:  L L Kupper; J K Haseman
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Randomization by cluster. Sample size requirements and analysis.

Authors:  A Donner; N Birkett; C Buck
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 4.897

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.