Single time point comparisons in longitudinal randomized controlled trials: power and bias in the presence of missing data
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND The primary analysis in a longitudinal randomized controlled trial is sometimes a comparison of arms at a single time point. While a two-sample t-test is often used, missing data are common in longitudinal studies and decreases power by reducing sample size. Mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) can test treatment effects at specific time points, have been shown to give unbiased estimates in certain missing data contexts, and may be more powerful than a two sample t-test. METHODS We conducted a simulation study to compare the performance of a complete-case t-test to a MMRM in terms of power and bias under different missing data mechanisms. Impact of within- and between-person variance, dropout mechanism, and variance-covariance structure were all considered. RESULTS While both complete-case t-test and MMRM provided unbiased estimation of treatment differences when data were missing completely at random, MMRM yielded an absolute power gain of up to 12 %. The MMRM provided up to 25 % absolute increased power over the t-test when data were missing at random, as well as unbiased estimation. CONCLUSIONS Investigators interested in single time point comparisons should use a MMRM with a contrast to gain power and unbiased estimation of treatment effects instead of a complete-case two sample t-test.
منابع مشابه
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Safety of Dapagliflozin in Type 1 Diabetes Patients
Background and Purpose: The dapagliflozin’s safety profile in insulin-treated adult type-1 diabetes mellites (T1DM) patients remains poorly explored. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared the risk of all-cause side effects, study discontinuation of participants due to side effects, urinary tract infection (UTI), diabetic ketoacidosis, and hypoglycemia between dapagliflozi...
متن کاملتورشها در مطالعات کارآزمایی کنترلدار تصادفی منتشرشده در نشریههای تخصصی پرستاری و مامایی ایران در سال 1389
Background & Objectives: Randomized controlled trials are the most reliable type of study to be able to compare different interventions in scientific research. The introduction of bias into the design and conduct of randomized controlled trials can seriously affect the accuracy of the results and led to the results be invalid. The aim of this study was to assess the bias in randomized controlle...
متن کاملتحلیل به قصد درمان در مطالعات کارآزمایی بالینی: یک مطالعه مروری
Background & Aim: Randomized controlled trials often suffer from two major problems, i.e., noncompliance and missing outcomes. One potential solution to this problem is using the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis approach. Therefore, the aim of this study was to review the concept of ITT and the most important issues related to it in practice since RCT researchers utilize it as a guide in order...
متن کاملBlindness in Randomized Controlled Trials
In combination with randomization, blinding or masking is an important factor in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), particularly in trials that assess therapeutic effects. Here an attempt is made to explain blindness and why it is important. In clinical trials, blinding is defined as the condition imposed on a study in which study participants, health care providers and assessors collecting o...
متن کاملImportant considerations in calculating and reporting of sample size in randomized controlled trials
Background: The calculation of the sample size is one of the most important steps in designing a randomized controlled trial. The purpose of this study is drawing the attention of researchers to the importance of calculating and reporting the sample size in randomized controlled trials. Methods: We reviewed related literature and guidelines and discussed some important issues in s...
متن کامل