O'Connell Nathaniel S, Dai Lin, Jiang Yunyun, Speiser Jaime L, Ward Ralph, Wei Wei, Carroll Rachel, Gebregziabher Mulugeta
Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
J Biom Biostat. 2017 Feb 24;8(1):1-8. doi: 10.4172/2155-6180.1000334.
Often repeated measures data are summarized into pre-post-treatment measurements. Various methods exist in the literature for estimating and testing treatment effect, including ANOVA, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), and linear mixed modeling (LMM). Under the first two methods, outcomes can either be modeled as the post treatment measurement (ANOVA-POST or ANCOVA-POST), or a change score between pre and post measurements (ANOVA-CHANGE, ANCOVA-CHANGE). In LMM, the outcome is modeled as a vector of responses with or without Kenward-Rogers adjustment. We consider five methods common in the literature, and discuss them in terms of supporting simulations and theoretical derivations of variance. Consistent with existing literature, our results demonstrate that each method leads to unbiased treatment effect estimates, and based on precision of estimates, 95% coverage probability, and power, ANCOVA modeling of either change scores or post-treatment score as the outcome, prove to be the most effective. We further demonstrate each method in terms of a real data example to exemplify comparisons in real clinical context.
通常,重复测量数据会被汇总为治疗前后的测量值。文献中存在多种估计和检验治疗效果的方法,包括方差分析(ANOVA)、协方差分析(ANCOVA)和线性混合模型(LMM)。在前两种方法中,结果可以建模为治疗后的测量值(ANOVA - POST或ANCOVA - POST),或者测量前后的变化分数(ANOVA - CHANGE,ANCOVA - CHANGE)。在LMM中,结果被建模为带有或不带有肯沃德 - 罗杰斯调整的响应向量。我们考虑了文献中常见的五种方法,并从支持模拟和方差理论推导的角度对它们进行了讨论。与现有文献一致,我们的结果表明,每种方法都能得出无偏的治疗效果估计值,并且基于估计的精度、95%的覆盖概率和检验效能,将变化分数或治疗后分数作为结果的ANCOVA建模被证明是最有效的。我们还通过一个实际数据示例展示了每种方法,以举例说明在实际临床背景下的比较。