Literature DB >> 35707111

Analyzing partially paired data: when can the unpaired portion(s) be safely ignored?

Qianya Qi1, Li Yan2, Lili Tian1.   

Abstract

Partially paired data, either with incompleteness in one or both arms, are common in practice. For testing equality of means of two arms, practitioners often use only the portion of data with complete pairs and perform paired tests. Although such tests (referred as 'naive paired tests') are legitimate, their powers might be low as only partial data are utilized. The recently proposed 'P-value pooling methods', based on combining P-values from two tests, use all data, have reasonable type-I error control and good power property. While it is generally believed that 'P-value pooling methods' are superior to 'naive paired tests' in terms of power as the former use more data than the latter, no detailed power comparison has been done. This paper aims to compare powers of 'naive paired tests' and 'P-value pooling methods' analytically and our findings are counterintuitive, i.e. the 'P-value pooling methods' do not always outperform the naive paired tests in terms of power. Based on these results, we present guidance on how to select the best test for testing equality of means with partially paired data.
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hypothesis testing; P-value; normality; paired data

Year:  2020        PMID: 35707111      PMCID: PMC9042157          DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2020.1864813

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Stat        ISSN: 0266-4763            Impact factor:   1.416


  10 in total

1.  A method for comparing two normal means using combined samples of correlated and uncorrelated data.

Authors:  Stephen W Looney; Peter W Jones
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2003-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Accurate mean comparisons for paired samples with missing data: an application to a smoking-cessation trial.

Authors:  Jin Xu; Solomon W Harrar
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.207

Review 3.  A comparative review of methods for comparing means using partially paired data.

Authors:  Beibei Guo; Ying Yuan
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.021

4.  Multiplication-combination tests for incomplete paired data.

Authors:  Lubna Amro; Frank Konietschke; Markus Pauly
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Rank-based two-sample tests for paired data with missing values.

Authors:  Youyi Fong; Ying Huang; Maria P Lemos; M Juliana Mcelrath
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 5.899

6.  A simple and robust method for partially matched samples using the p-values pooling approach.

Authors:  Pei Fen Kuan; Bo Huang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-02-17       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Statistical methods of translating microarray data into clinically relevant diagnostic information in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Byung Soo Kim; Inyoung Kim; Sunho Lee; Sangcheol Kim; Sun Young Rha; Hyun Cheol Chung
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  Testing equality of means in partially paired data with incompleteness in single response.

Authors:  Qianya Qi; Li Yan; Lili Tian
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-04-04       Impact factor: 3.021

9.  Acupuncture for chronic headache in primary care: large, pragmatic, randomised trial.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Rebecca W Rees; Catherine E Zollman; Rob McCarney; Claire M Smith; Nadia Ellis; Peter Fisher; Robbert Van Haselen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-03-15

10.  A shared transcriptional program in early breast neoplasias despite genetic and clinical distinctions.

Authors:  Alayne L Brunner; Jun Li; Xiangqian Guo; Robert T Sweeney; Sushama Varma; Shirley X Zhu; Rui Li; Robert Tibshirani; Robert B West
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 13.583

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.