IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0232970.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pooling individual participant data from randomized controlled trials: Exploring potential loss of information

Author

Listed:
  • Lennard L van Wanrooij
  • Marieke P Hoevenaar-Blom
  • Nicola Coley
  • Tiia Ngandu
  • Yannick Meiller
  • Juliette Guillemont
  • Anna Rosenberg
  • Cathrien R L Beishuizen
  • Eric P Moll van Charante
  • Hilkka Soininen
  • Carol Brayne
  • Sandrine Andrieu
  • Miia Kivipelto
  • Edo Richard

Abstract

Background: Pooling individual participant data to enable pooled analyses is often complicated by diversity in variables across available datasets. Therefore, recoding original variables is often necessary to build a pooled dataset. We aimed to quantify how much information is lost in this process and to what extent this jeopardizes validity of analyses results. Methods: Data were derived from a platform that was developed to pool data from three randomized controlled trials on the effect of treatment of cardiovascular risk factors on cognitive decline or dementia. We quantified loss of information using the R-squared of linear regression models with pooled variables as a function of their original variable(s). In case the R-squared was below 0.8, we additionally explored the potential impact of loss of information for future analyses. We did this second step by comparing whether the Beta coefficient of the predictor differed more than 10% when adding original or recoded variables as a confounder in a linear regression model. In a simulation we randomly sampled numbers, recoded those 1000 to 1 and varied the range of the continuous variable, the ratio of recoded zeroes to recoded ones, or both, and again extracted the R-squared from linear models to quantify information loss. Results: The R-squared was below 0.8 for 8 out of 91 recoded variables. In 4 cases this had a substantial impact on the regression models, particularly when a continuous variable was recoded into a discrete variable. Our simulation showed that the least information is lost when the ratio of recoded zeroes to ones is 1:1. Conclusions: Large, pooled datasets provide great opportunities, justifying the efforts for data harmonization. Still, caution is warranted when using recoded variables which variance is explained limitedly by their original variables as this may jeopardize the validity of study results.

Suggested Citation

  • Lennard L van Wanrooij & Marieke P Hoevenaar-Blom & Nicola Coley & Tiia Ngandu & Yannick Meiller & Juliette Guillemont & Anna Rosenberg & Cathrien R L Beishuizen & Eric P Moll van Charante & Hilkka So, 2020. "Pooling individual participant data from randomized controlled trials: Exploring potential loss of information," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-9, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0232970
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232970
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232970
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232970&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0232970?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Márcio Augusto Diniz & Mourad Tighiouart & André Rogatko, 2019. "Comparison between continuous and discrete doses for model based designs in cancer dose finding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nancy Flournoy & José Moler & Fernando Plo, 2020. "Performance Measures in Dose‐Finding Experiments," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 88(3), pages 728-751, December.

    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:plo:pone00:0232970. 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: 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.

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