BACKGROUND: Most Alzheimer disease clinical trials that compare the use of health services rely on reports of caregivers. The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-reports among older adults with Alzheimer disease and their caregiver proxy respondents. This issue is particularly relevant to Alzheimer disease clinical trials because inaccuracy can lead both to loss of power and increased bias in study outcomes. METHODS: We compared respondent accuracy in reporting any use and in reporting the frequency of use with actual utilization data as documented in a comprehensive database. We next simulated the impact of underreporting and overreporting on sample size estimates and treatment effect bias for clinical trials comparing utilization between experimental groups. RESULTS: Respondents self-reports have a poor level of accuracy with κ-values often below 0.5. Respondents tend to underreport use even for rare events such as hospitalizations and nursing home stays. In analyses simulating underreporting and overreporting of varying magnitude, we found that errors in self-reports can increase the required sample size by 15% to 30%. In addition, bias in the reported treatment effect ranged from 3% to 18% due to both underreporting and overreporting errors. CONCLUSIONS: Use of self-report data in clinical trials of Alzheimer disease treatments may inflate sample size needs. Even when adequate power is achieved by increasing sample size, reporting errors can result in a biased estimate of the true effect size of the intervention.
BACKGROUND: Most Alzheimer disease clinical trials that compare the use of health services rely on reports of caregivers. The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-reports among older adults with Alzheimer disease and their caregiver proxy respondents. This issue is particularly relevant to Alzheimer disease clinical trials because inaccuracy can lead both to loss of power and increased bias in study outcomes. METHODS: We compared respondent accuracy in reporting any use and in reporting the frequency of use with actual utilization data as documented in a comprehensive database. We next simulated the impact of underreporting and overreporting on sample size estimates and treatment effect bias for clinical trials comparing utilization between experimental groups. RESULTS: Respondents self-reports have a poor level of accuracy with κ-values often below 0.5. Respondents tend to underreport use even for rare events such as hospitalizations and nursing home stays. In analyses simulating underreporting and overreporting of varying magnitude, we found that errors in self-reports can increase the required sample size by 15% to 30%. In addition, bias in the reported treatment effect ranged from 3% to 18% due to both underreporting and overreporting errors. CONCLUSIONS: Use of self-report data in clinical trials of Alzheimer disease treatments may inflate sample size needs. Even when adequate power is achieved by increasing sample size, reporting errors can result in a biased estimate of the true effect size of the intervention.
Authors: C Courtney; D Farrell; R Gray; R Hills; L Lynch; E Sellwood; S Edwards; W Hardyman; J Raftery; P Crome; C Lendon; H Shaw; P Bentham Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-06-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M Bond; G Rogers; J Peters; R Anderson; M Hoyle; A Miners; T Moxham; S Davis; P Thokala; A Wailoo; M Jeffreys; C Hyde Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2012 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Rob Jones; Bart Sheehan; Patrick Phillips; Ed Juszczak; Jessica Adams; Ashley Baldwin; Clive Ballard; Sube Banerjee; Bob Barber; Peter Bentham; Richard Brown; Alistair Burns; Tom Dening; David Findlay; Richard Gray; Mary Griffin; Clive Holmes; Alan Hughes; Robin Jacoby; Tony Johnson; Roy Jones; Martin Knapp; James Lindesay; Ian McKeith; Rupert McShane; Ajay Macharouthu; John O'Brien; Caroline Onions; Peter Passmore; James Raftery; Craig Ritchie; Rob Howard Journal: Trials Date: 2009-07-24 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Michael D Hurd; Paco Martorell; Adeline Delavande; Kathleen J Mullen; Kenneth M Langa Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 91.245