Evaluation of inferential methods for the net benefit and win ratio statistics.


Journal

Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics
ISSN: 1520-5711
Titre abrégé: J Biopharm Stat
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9200436

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 09 2020
Historique:
pubmed: 26 2 2020
medline: 3 8 2021
entrez: 26 2 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

General Pairwise Comparison (GPC) statistics, such as the net benefit and the win ratio, have been applied in clinical trial data analysis and design. In the literature, inferential methods based on re-sampling, asymptotic or exact methods have been proposed for these GPC statistics, but they have not been compared to each other. In this paper, the small sample bias of the variance estimation, Type I error control and 95% confidence interval coverage of the GPC inferential methods are evaluated using simulations. The exact permutation and bootstrap tests perform best in all evaluated aspects for the net benefit, while the exact bootstrap test performs best for the win ratio.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32097079
doi: 10.1080/10543406.2020.1730873
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

765-782

Auteurs

Johan Verbeeck (J)

DSI, I-Biostat, University Hasselt , Hasselt, Belgium.

Brice Ozenne (B)

Neurobiology Research Unit, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen, Denmark.
Department of Public Health, Section of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen, Denmark.

William N Anderson (WN)

Carpinteria , California, USA.

Articles similaires

Humans Meta-Analysis as Topic Sample Size Models, Statistical Computer Simulation
Humans Self-Control Longitudinal Studies Child, Preschool Child

Why experimental variation in neuroimaging should be embraced.

Gregory Kiar, Jeanette A Mumford, Ting Xu et al.
1.00
Humans Neuroimaging Brain Reproducibility of Results Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Classifications MeSH