Sterling McPherson1, Celestina Barbosa-Leiker, Mary Rose Mamey, Michael McDonell, Craig K Enders, John Roll. 1. College of Nursing, Washington State University, Spokane, WA, USA; Department of Psychology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA; Program of Excellence in Addictions Research, Washington State University, Spokane, WA, USA; Program for Rural Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment, Washington State University, Spokane, WA, USA; Translational Addictions Research Center, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare three missing data strategies: (i) the latent growth model that assumes the data are missing at random (MAR) model; (ii) the Diggle-Kenward missing not at random (MNAR) model, where dropout is a function of previous/concurrent urinalysis (UA) submissions; and (iii) the Wu-Carroll MNAR model where dropout is a function of the growth factors. DESIGN : Secondary data analysis of a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network trial that examined a 7-day versus 28-day taper (i.e. stepwise decrease in buprenorphine/naloxone) on the likelihood of submitting an opioid-positive UA during treatment. SETTING: 11 out-patient treatment settings in 10 US cities. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 516 opioid-dependent participants. MEASUREMENTS: Opioid UAs provided across the 4-week treatment period. FINDINGS: The MAR model showed a significant effect (B = -0.45, P < 0.05) of trial arm on the opioid-positive UA slope (i.e. 28-day taper participants were less likely to submit a positive UA over time) with a small effect size (d = 0.20). The MNAR Diggle-Kenward model demonstrated a significant (B = -0.64, P < 0.01) effect of trial arm on the slope with a large effect size (d = 0.82). The MNAR Wu-Carroll model showed a significant (B = -0.41, P < 0.05) effect of trial arm on the UA slope that was relatively small (d = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: This performance comparison of three missing data strategies (latent growth model, Diggle-Kenward selection model, Wu-Carrol selection model) on sample data indicates a need for increased use of sensitivity analyses in clinical trial research. Given the potential sensitivity of the trial arm effect to missing data assumptions, it is critical for researchers to consider whether the assumptions associated with each model are defensible.
AIMS: To compare three missing data strategies: (i) the latent growth model that assumes the data are missing at random (MAR) model; (ii) the Diggle-Kenward missing not at random (MNAR) model, where dropout is a function of previous/concurrent urinalysis (UA) submissions; and (iii) the Wu-Carroll MNAR model where dropout is a function of the growth factors. DESIGN : Secondary data analysis of a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network trial that examined a 7-day versus 28-day taper (i.e. stepwise decrease in buprenorphine/naloxone) on the likelihood of submitting an opioid-positive UA during treatment. SETTING: 11 out-patient treatment settings in 10 US cities. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 516 opioid-dependent participants. MEASUREMENTS: Opioid UAs provided across the 4-week treatment period. FINDINGS: The MAR model showed a significant effect (B = -0.45, P < 0.05) of trial arm on the opioid-positive UA slope (i.e. 28-day taper participants were less likely to submit a positive UA over time) with a small effect size (d = 0.20). The MNAR Diggle-Kenward model demonstrated a significant (B = -0.64, P < 0.01) effect of trial arm on the slope with a large effect size (d = 0.82). The MNAR Wu-Carroll model showed a significant (B = -0.41, P < 0.05) effect of trial arm on the UA slope that was relatively small (d = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: This performance comparison of three missing data strategies (latent growth model, Diggle-Kenward selection model, Wu-Carrol selection model) on sample data indicates a need for increased use of sensitivity analyses in clinical trial research. Given the potential sensitivity of the trial arm effect to missing data assumptions, it is critical for researchers to consider whether the assumptions associated with each model are defensible.
Authors: Maxine L Stitzer; Jessica Peirce; Nancy M Petry; Kimberly Kirby; John Roll; Joseph Krasnansky; Allan Cohen; Jack Blaine; Ryan Vandrey; Ken Kolodner; Rui Li Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Steven J Hadeed; Mary Kay O'Rourke; Jefferey L Burgess; Robin B Harris; Robert A Canales Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2020-05-03 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: André Q C Miguel; Clarice S Madruga; Hugo Cogo-Moreira; Rodolfo Yamauchi; Viviane Simões; Ariadne Ribeiro; Claudio J da Silva; Andrew Fruci; Michael McDonell; Sterling McPherson; John M Roll; Ronaldo R Laranjeira Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Sterling McPherson; Michael Orr; Crystal Lederhos; Michael McDonell; Emily Leickly; Katherine Hirchak; Oladunni A Oluwoye; Sean M Murphy; Matthew Layton; John M Roll Journal: Behav Pharmacol Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 2.293
Authors: Oladunni Oluwoye; Jordan Skalisky; Ekaterina Burduli; Naomi S Chaytor; Sterling McPherson; Sean M Murphy; Jalene Herron; Katherine Hirchak; Mason Burley; Richard K Ries; John M Roll; Michael G McDonell Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-04-20 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Celestina Barbosa-Leiker; Sterling McPherson; Matthew E Layton; Ekaterina Burduli; John M Roll; Walter Ling Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2018-04-19 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Sterling M McPherson; Ekaterina Burduli; Crystal Lederhos Smith; Olivia Brooks; Michael F Orr; Celestina Barbosa-Leiker; Trynke Hoekstra; Michael G McDonell; Sean M Murphy; Matthew Layton; John M Roll Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Brian D Kiluk; Kathleen M Carroll; Amy Duhig; Daniel E Falk; Kyle Kampman; Shengan Lai; Raye Z Litten; David J McCann; Ivan D Montoya; Kenzie L Preston; Phil Skolnick; Constance Weisner; George Woody; Redonna Chandler; Michael J Detke; Kelly Dunn; Robert H Dworkin; Joanne Fertig; Jennifer Gewandter; F Gerard Moeller; Tatiana Ramey; Megan Ryan; Kenneth Silverman; Eric C Strain Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-11-21 Impact factor: 4.492