Department of Management Science, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
PLoS One. 2022 May 27;17(5):e0269128. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269128. eCollection 2022.
The consideration of individual equivalence provides an essential alternative to average equivalence in two-group comparative studies. A common procedure for declaring individual equivalence adopts the tolerance intervals of the designated proportions of measurement differences. This statistical practice is a direct generalization of the widely used two one-sided tests (TOST) for average equivalence. Such TOST extensions often do not have adequate control of Type I error and result in excessively conservative tests. To signify and resolve the underlying issues of existing methods, this paper presents exact tests for assessing individual equivalence between two treatments under parallel group and crossover designs. Rigorous evaluations are conducted to clarify the discrepancy of critical values and Type I error probabilities between the equivalence procedures. The findings elucidate the shortcoming of the TOST technique and the advantage of the proposed approach. The associated power and sample size calculations are also justified through simulation studies.
个体等效性的考虑为两组比较研究中的平均等效性提供了一种重要的替代方法。一种常见的个体等效性判定方法是采用指定测量差值比例的容忍区间。这种统计方法是广泛使用的用于平均等效性的双边检验(TOST)的直接推广。这种 TOST 扩展通常不能充分控制第一类错误,导致测试过于保守。为了表示和解决现有方法的潜在问题,本文提出了在平行组和交叉设计下评估两种处理方法之间个体等效性的精确检验。通过严格的评估,阐明了等效性程序之间临界值和第一类错误概率的差异。研究结果阐明了 TOST 技术的缺点和所提出方法的优势。通过模拟研究也证明了相关的功效和样本量计算的合理性。