IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v53y2008i1p209-221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing homogeneity of risk difference in stratified randomized trials with noncompliance

Author

Listed:
  • Lui, Kung-Jong
  • Chang, Kuang-Chao

Abstract

When assessing a treatment effect in the presence of confounders, we often employ stratified analysis and obtain a summary estimate of the risk difference (RD) under the assumption that the underlying RD is homogeneous across strata. In a randomized clinical trial (RCT), we may commonly come across the data in which there are patients who do not comply with their assigned treatments. Thus, to avoid reaching a misleading conclusion due to overlooking an interaction between treatments and strata, it is important that we can incorporate noncompliance into examining the homogeneity of the RD. In this paper, we develop four statistics for testing the homogeneity of the RD in a stratified RCT with noncompliance. These include the test statistic derived from the weighted-least-squares (WLS) method, the test statistic using the WLS method and tanh-1(x) transformation, the test statistic using the weight similar to the Mantel-Haenszel (MH) estimator, and the test statistic using an optimal weight and the MH point estimator. We apply Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the performance of these test statistics with respect to Type I error and power in a variety of situations. We use the data taken from a multiple risk factors intervention trial and a numerical example of simulated data to illustrate the practical use of these test statistics. Finally, we do a sensitivity analysis and discuss why applying test statistics for the ITT analysis to test the homogeneity of RD as focused in this paper can lead us to make an incorrect inference.

Suggested Citation

  • Lui, Kung-Jong & Chang, Kuang-Chao, 2008. "Testing homogeneity of risk difference in stratified randomized trials with noncompliance," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 209-221, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2008:i:1:p:209-221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(08)00351-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kung-Jong Lui & Colleen Kelly, 2000. "A Revisit on Tests for Homogeneity of the Risk Difference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 309-315, March.
    2. Shigeyuki Matsui, 2005. "Stratified Analysis in Randomized Trials with Noncompliance," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 816-823, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhiming Li & Changxing Ma & Keyi Mou, 2023. "Testing the common risk difference of proportions for stratified uni‐ and bilateral correlated data," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 77(3), pages 340-364, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bandyopadhyay, Uttam & Sarkar, Suman & Biswas, Atanu, 2022. "Sequential confidence interval for comparing two Bernoulli distributions in a non-conventional set-up," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Dankmar Böhning & Jesus Sarol Jr., 2000. "Estimating Risk Difference in Multicenter Studies Under Baseline-Risk Heterogeneity," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 304-308, March.
    3. Guo, Jianhua & Ma, Yanping & Shi, Ning-Zhong & Shing Lau, Tai, 2004. "Testing for homogeneity of relative differences under inverse sampling," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 613-624, January.
    4. Kung-Jong Lui & Kuang-Chao Chang, 2010. "Notes on odds ratio estimation for a randomized clinical trial with noncompliance and missing outcomes," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(12), pages 2057-2071.
    5. Lui, Kung-Jong, 2008. "Notes on interval estimation of risk difference in stratified noncompliance randomized trials: A Monte Carlo evaluation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 4091-4103, April.
    6. Lui, Kung-Jong & Cumberland, William G., 2008. "Notes on estimation of proportion ratio under a non-compliance randomized trial with missing outcomes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(9), pages 4325-4345, May.
    7. Lui, Kung-Jong & Chang, Kuang-Chao, 2009. "Interval estimation of odds ratio in a stratified randomized clinical trial with noncompliance," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 2754-2766, May.
    8. Ali Reza Soltanian & Soghrat Faghihzadeh, 2012. "A generalization of the Grizzle model to the estimation of treatment effects in crossover trials with non-compliance," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(5), pages 1037-1048, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2008:i:1:p:209-221. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.