Literature DB >> 34991359

Marginal modeling in community randomized trials with rare events: Utilization of the negative binomial regression model.

Philip M Westgate1, Debbie M Cheng2, Daniel J Feaster3, Soledad Fernández4, Abigail B Shoben5, Nathan Vandergrift6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This work is motivated by the HEALing Communities Study, which is a post-test only cluster randomized trial in which communities are randomized to two different trial arms. The primary interest is in reducing opioid overdose fatalities, which will be collected as a count outcome at the community level. Communities range in size from thousands to over one million residents, and fatalities are expected to be rare. Traditional marginal modeling approaches in the cluster randomized trial literature include the use of generalized estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure when utilizing subject-level data, or analogously quasi-likelihood based on an over-dispersed binomial variance when utilizing community-level data. These approaches account for and estimate the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, which should be provided in the results from a cluster randomized trial. Alternatively, the coefficient of variation or R coefficient could be reported. In this article, we show that negative binomial regression can also be utilized when communities are large and events are rare. The objectives of this article are (1) to show that the negative binomial regression approach targets the same marginal regression parameter(s) as an over-dispersed binomial model and to explain why the estimates may differ; (2) to derive formulas relating the negative binomial overdispersion parameter k with the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, coefficient of variation, and R coefficient; and (3) analyze pre-intervention data from the HEALing Communities Study to demonstrate and contrast models and to show how to report the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, coefficient of variation, and R coefficient when utilizing negative binomial regression.
METHODS: Negative binomial and over-dispersed binomial regression modeling are contrasted in terms of model setup, regression parameter estimation, and formulation of the overdispersion parameter. Three specific models are used to illustrate concepts and address the third objective.
RESULTS: The negative binomial regression approach targets the same marginal regression parameter(s) as an over-dispersed binomial model, although estimates may differ. Practical differences arise in regard to how overdispersion, and hence the intra-cluster correlation coefficient is modeled. The negative binomial overdispersion parameter is approximately equal to the ratio of the intra-cluster correlation coefficient and marginal probability, the square of the coefficient of variation, and the R coefficient minus 1. As a result, estimates corresponding to all four of these different types of overdispersion parameterizations can be reported when utilizing negative binomial regression.
CONCLUSION: Negative binomial regression provides a valid, practical, alternative approach to the analysis of count data, and corresponding reporting of overdispersion parameters, from community randomized trials in which communities are large and events are rare.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cluster randomized trial; empirical covariance matrix; generalized estimating equations; intra-cluster correlation coefficient; quasi-likelihood

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34991359      PMCID: PMC9038610          DOI: 10.1177/17407745211063479

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.599


  36 in total

1.  An integrated population-averaged approach to the design, analysis and sample size determination of cluster-unit trials.

Authors:  John S Preisser; Mary L Young; Daniel J Zaccaro; Mark Wolfson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2003-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Extension of the modified Poisson regression model to prospective studies with correlated binary data.

Authors:  G Y Zou; Allan Donner
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Improving small-sample inference in group randomized trials with binary outcomes.

Authors:  Philip M Westgate; Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit in log binomial regression.

Authors:  L Blizzard; D W Hosmer
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.207

5.  On small-sample inference in group randomized trials with binary outcomes and cluster-level covariates.

Authors:  Philip M Westgate
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 2.207

Review 6.  Essential Ingredients and Innovations in the Design and Analysis of Group-Randomized Trials.

Authors:  David M Murray; Monica Taljaard; Elizabeth L Turner; Stephanie M George
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 21.981

7.  Community dashboards to support data-informed decision-making in the HEALing communities study.

Authors:  Elwin Wu; Jennifer Villani; Alissa Davis; Naleef Fareed; Daniel R Harris; Timothy R Huerta; Marc R LaRochelle; Cortney C Miller; Emmanuel A Oga
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 4.492

8.  The HEALing (Helping to End Addiction Long-term SM) Communities Study: Protocol for a cluster randomized trial at the community level to reduce opioid overdose deaths through implementation of an integrated set of evidence-based practices.

Authors: 
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2020-10-17       Impact factor: 4.852

9.  Operationalizing and selecting outcome measures for the HEALing Communities Study.

Authors:  Svetla Slavova; Marc R LaRochelle; Elisabeth D Root; Daniel J Feaster; Jennifer Villani; Charles E Knott; Jeffery Talbert; Aimee Mack; Dushka Crane; Dana Bernson; Austin Booth; Sharon L Walsh
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 4.852

10.  Health economic design for cost, cost-effectiveness and simulation analyses in the HEALing Communities Study.

Authors:  Arnie P Aldridge; Carolina Barbosa; Joshua A Barocas; Joshua L Bush; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Kristin J Harlow; Ayaz Hyder; Benjamin P Linas; Kathryn E McCollister; Jake R Morgan; Sean M Murphy; Caroline Savitzky; Bruce R Schackman; Eric E Seiber; Laura E Starbird; Jennifer Villani; Gary A Zarkin
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2020-10-03       Impact factor: 4.852

View more
  3 in total

1.  Performance of model-based vs. permutation tests in the HEALing (Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM) Communities Study, a covariate-constrained cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Xiaoyu Tang; Timothy Heeren; Philip M Westgate; Daniel J Feaster; Soledad A Fernandez; Nathan Vandergrift; Debbie M Cheng
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 2.728

2.  Cluster randomised trials with a binary outcome and a small number of clusters: comparison of individual and cluster level analysis method.

Authors:  Jennifer A Thompson; Clemence Leyrat; Katherine L Fielding; Richard J Hayes
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 4.612

3.  Protocol for community-driven selection of strategies to implement evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdoses in the HEALing Communities Study: a trial to evaluate a community-engaged intervention in Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York and Ohio.

Authors:  April M Young; Jennifer L Brown; Timothy Hunt; Linda S Sprague Martinez; Redonna Chandler; Emmanuel Oga; T John Winhusen; Trevor Baker; Tracy Battaglia; Rachel Bowers-Sword; Amy Button; Amanda Fallin-Bennett; Laura Fanucchi; Patricia Freeman; LaShawn M Glasgow; Jennifer Gulley; Charles Kendell; Michelle Lofwall; Michael S Lyons; Maria Quinn; Bruce David Rapkin; Hilary L Surratt; Sharon L Walsh
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-09-19       Impact factor: 3.006

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.