Bias, precision and statistical power of analysis of covariance in the analysis of randomized trials with baseline imbalance: a simulation study.
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Across a range of correlations between pre- and post-treatment scores and at varying levels and direction of baseline imbalance, ANCOVA remains the optimum statistical method for the analysis of continuous outcomes in RCTs, in terms of bias, precision and statistical power.Abstract:
Analysis of variance (ANOVA), change-score analysis (CSA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) respond differently to baseline imbalance in randomized controlled trials. However, no empirical studies appear to have quantified the differential bias and precision of estimates derived from these methods of analysis, and their relative statistical power, in relation to combinations of levels of key trial characteristics. This simulation study therefore examined the relative bias, precision and statistical power of these three analyses using simulated trial data. 126 hypothetical trial scenarios were evaluated (126 000 datasets), each with continuous data simulated by using a combination of levels of: treatment effect; pretest-posttest correlation; direction and magnitude of baseline imbalance. The bias, precision and power of each method of analysis were calculated for each scenario. Compared to the unbiased estimates produced by ANCOVA, both ANOVA and CSA are subject to bias, in relation to pretest-posttest correlation and the direction of baseline imbalance. Additionally, ANOVA and CSA are less precise than ANCOVA, especially when pretest-posttest correlation ≥ 0.3. When groups are balanced at baseline, ANCOVA is at least as powerful as the other analyses. Apparently greater power of ANOVA and CSA at certain imbalances is achieved in respect of a biased treatment effect. Across a range of correlations between pre- and post-treatment scores and at varying levels and direction of baseline imbalance, ANCOVA remains the optimum statistical method for the analysis of continuous outcomes in RCTs, in terms of bias, precision and statistical power.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese adolescents aged 12 to 17 years.
Lena Al-Khudairy,Emma Loveman,Jill L Colquitt,Emma Mead,Rebecca E. Johnson,Hannah Fraser,Joan Olajide,Marie H. Murphy,Rochelle Velho,Claire O'Malley,Liane B. Azevedo,Louisa Ells,Maria Inti Metzendorf,Karen Rees +13 more
TL;DR: The studies contributing most information to outcomes of weight and body mass index (BMI) were from studies at a low risk of bias, but studies with a highrisk of bias provided data on adverse events and quality of life.
Journal ArticleDOI
How Many Participants Do We Have to Include in Properly Powered Experiments? A Tutorial of Power Analysis with Reference Tables.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe reference numbers needed for the designs most often used by psychologists, including single-variable between-groups and repeated-measures designs with two and three levels, two-factor designs involving two repeated measures and one repeated measure, and split-plot design.
Journal ArticleDOI
The risks and rewards of covariate adjustment in randomized trials: an assessment of 12 outcomes from 8 studies
TL;DR: Assessment of the impact of covariate adjustment on 12 outcomes from 8 studies across a range of therapeutic areas found that adjustment for known prognostic covariates can lead to substantial increases in power, and should be routinely incorporated into the analysis of randomized trials.
Journal ArticleDOI
Diet, physical activity, and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obesity in preschool children up to the age of 6 years
Jill L Colquitt,Emma Loveman,Claire O'Malley,Liane B. Azevedo,Emma Mead,Lena Al-Khudairy,Louisa Ells,Maria-Inti Metzendorf,Karen Rees +8 more
TL;DR: In trials comparing a multicomponent intervention withusual care, enhanced usual care, or information control, a greater reduction in body mass index (BMI) z score is found in the intervention groups at the end of the intervention, but only the dairy-rich diet maintained this at 36 months' follow-up.
Journal ArticleDOI
A primary care nurse-delivered walking intervention in older adults: PACE (Pedometer Accelerometer Consultation Evaluation)-Lift cluster randomised controlled trial
Tess Harris,Sally Kerry,Christina R. Victor,Ulf Ekelund,Alison Woodcock,Steve Iliffe,Peter H. Whincup,Carole Beighton,Michael Ussher,Elizabeth S Limb,Lee David,Debbie Brewin,Fredrika Adams,Annabelle Rogers,Derek G Cook +14 more
TL;DR: The PACE-Lift trial increased both step-counts and objectively measured MVPA in ≥10-minute bouts in 60–75 year olds at 3 and 12 months, with no effect on adverse events.
References
More filters
Book
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
TL;DR: The concepts of power analysis are discussed in this paper, where Chi-square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables, t-Test for Means, and Sign Test are used.
Journal ArticleDOI
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
An-Wen Chan,Jennifer Tetzlaff,Peter C Gøtzsche,Douglas G. Altman,Howard Mann,Jesse A. Berlin,Kay Dickersin,Asbjørn Hróbjartsson,Kenneth F. Schulz,Wendy R. Parulekar,Karmela Krleza-Jeric,Andreas Laupacis,David Moher,David Moher +13 more
TL;DR: The SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides important information to promote full understanding of the checklist recommendations and strongly recommends that this explanatory paper be used in conjunction with the SPIRit Statement.
Journal ArticleDOI
Statistics notes: Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements.
TL;DR: In many randomised trials researchers measure a continuous variable at baseline and again as an outcome assessed at follow up to see whether a treatment can reduce pre-existing levels of pain, anxiety, hypertension, and the like.
Journal ArticleDOI
Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials.
TL;DR: Clinical trials need a predefined statistical analysis plan for uses of baseline data, especially covariate-adjusted analyses and subgroup analyses, and investigators and journals need to adopt improved standards of statistical reporting, and exercise caution when drawing conclusions from subgroup findings.
Journal ArticleDOI
Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems.
TL;DR: Key issues include: the overuse and overinterpretation of subgroup analyses; the underuse of appropriate statistical tests for interaction; inconsistencies in the use of covariate-adjustment; the lack of clear guidelines on covariate selection; the over use of baseline comparisons in some studies; the misuses of significance tests for baseline comparability, and the need for trials to have a predefined statistical analysis plan.
Related Papers (5)
Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses.
Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials
Jonathan A C Sterne,Alex J. Sutton,John P. A. Ioannidis,Norma Terrin,David R. Jones,Joseph Lau,James R. Carpenter,Gerta Rücker,Roger M. Harbord,Christopher H. Schmid,Jennifer Tetzlaff,Jonathan J Deeks,Jaime Peters,Petra Macaskill,Guido Schwarzer,Sue Duval,Douglas G. Altman,David Moher,Julian P T Higgins +18 more