Author
Listed:
- Tanja Krone
- Ruud Boessen
- Sabina Bijlsma
- Robin van Stokkum
- Nard D S Clabbers
- Wilrike J Pasman
Abstract
Background: N-of-1 designs gain popularity in nutritional research because of the improving technological possibilities, practical applicability and promise of increased accuracy and sensitivity, especially in the field of personalized nutrition. This move asks for a search of applicable statistical methods. Objective: To demonstrate the differences of three popular statistical methods in analyzing treatment effects of data obtained in N-of-1 designs. Method: We compare Individual-participant data meta-analysis, frequentist and Bayesian linear mixed effect models using a simulation experiment. Furthermore, we demonstrate the merits of the Bayesian model including prior information by analyzing data of an empirical study on weight loss. Results: The linear mixed effect models are to be preferred over the meta-analysis method, since the individual effects are estimated more accurately as evidenced by the lower errors, especially with lower sample sizes. Differences between Bayesian and frequentist mixed models were found to be small, indicating that they will lead to the same results without including an informative prior. Conclusion: For empirical data, the Bayesian mixed model allows the inclusion of prior knowledge and gives potential for population based and personalized inference.
Suggested Citation
Tanja Krone & Ruud Boessen & Sabina Bijlsma & Robin van Stokkum & Nard D S Clabbers & Wilrike J Pasman, 2020.
"The possibilities of the use of N-of-1 and do-it-yourself trials in nutritional research,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0232680
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232680
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pone00:0232680. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.