Hsieh F Y
Computing and Statistical Services, Anaquest Inc., BOC Health Care, Murray Hill, NJ 07974.
Stat Med. 1992 Jun 15;11(8):1091-8. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780110810.
This paper compares the sample size formulae given by Schoenfeld, Freedman, Hsieh and Shuster for unbalanced designs. Freedman's formula predicts the highest power for the logrank test when the sample size ratio of the two groups equals the reciprocal of the hazard ratio. The other three formulae predict highest powers when sample sizes in the two groups are equal. Results of Monte Carlo simulations performed for the power of the logrank test with various sample size ratios show that the power curve of the logrank test is almost flat between a sample size ratio of one and a sample size ratio close to the reciprocal of the hazard ratio. An equal sample-size allocation may not maximize the power of the logrank test. Monte Carlo simulations also show that, under an exponential model, when the sample size ratio is toward the reciprocal of the hazard ratio, Freedman's formula predicts more accurate powers. Schoenfeld's formula, however, seems best for predicting powers with equal sample size.
本文比较了舍恩菲尔德、弗里德曼、谢和舒斯特给出的用于不平衡设计的样本量公式。当两组的样本量之比等于风险比的倒数时,弗里德曼公式预测对数秩检验的功效最高。其他三个公式在两组样本量相等时预测功效最高。针对不同样本量比进行的对数秩检验功效的蒙特卡罗模拟结果表明,对数秩检验的功效曲线在样本量比为1和接近风险比倒数的样本量比之间几乎是平坦的。相等的样本量分配可能无法使对数秩检验的功效最大化。蒙特卡罗模拟还表明,在指数模型下,当样本量比趋向于风险比的倒数时,弗里德曼公式预测的功效更准确。然而,舍恩菲尔德公式似乎最适合在样本量相等时预测功效。