PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8023049

Some power considerations when deciding to use transformations.

Abstract

Conventional wisdom suggests that for small data sets having substantial skew, one should attempt to determine the correct distributional form, if possible, and apply statistical methods appropriate for that distribution. Transformations such as the log or square root are often used. If an appropriate distributional form cannot be determined, a distribution-free procedure such as a rank transformation or a randomization test procedure can be used. To better appreciate the effect of such alternatives on both the type I error and power of detecting differences between treatment groups, simulation studies were conducted for responses having specific gamma G(r, theta) and log-normal ln(M, V) distributions. The gamma and log-normal distributions were selected so that they had the same first two moments. A simple two group design was assumed. The reference group always had an average disease level mu = 3.0 (mu = r theta for gamma, mu = M for log-normal), and the treatment group always had means whose reductions ranged from 0 per cent to 50 per cent. The effect of distributional type and the degree of skewness was investigated by varying the population parameter values. Six statistical test procedures were compared for the gamma distributions. All test procedures were robust relative to the type I error. The UMP test based on a ratio of sample means produced the greatest power for all combinations of n, r and RT. The power losses associated with the randomization test, the t-test on original scale, and the t-test on the square root scale were very small, (3 per cent to 6 per cent in absolute value) for n = 10 and 15, and less than 2 per cent for group sizes of 25 or more. The power loss associated with the t-test on the log scale was much larger, ranging from 5 per cent to 10 per cent smaller power than the t-test on original scale. The Wilcoxon rank test produced similar results to that of the LOG t-test for small samples. The power for the shifted LOG (X+c) test increased monotonically to the asymptotic value of the ORIG t-test. The same five test procedures based on differences in sample means were then compared for the corresponding log-normal distributions. The UMP test, that is, LOG(X), produced the highest power. There was very little power lost for the SQRT t-test. The loss in power varied between 2 per cent and 5 per cent for the RANK test.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Kingman, G Zion. Some power considerations when deciding to use transformations.. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780130537

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Issues in designing flexible trials.

We outline the general framework of adaptive combination tests and discuss their relationship to flexible group sequential designs. An important field of applications is sample size reassessment. We discuss reassessment rules based on conditional power arguments using either the observed or the prefixed effect size. These rules tend to lead to large expected sample sizes for small actual effects. However, the application of a maximal bound for the second stage sample size leads to more favourable properties. Additionally, we consider an optimized reassessment rule in terms of expected sample sizes. Since the adaptive design does not use the classical test statistics for some types of sample size reassessments, the adaptive test may reject the null hypothesis while the classical one-sample test does not. We characterize sample size reassessment rules, where such inconsistencies are avoided. Finally, the extension of flexibility to the number of stages is explored. In the first interim analysis a second interim analysis is only planned if the chance to achieve a decision there is high. This leads to savings in the average number of interim analysis performed, without paying a noticeable price in terms of expected sample size.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Combined hepatitis B vaccines.

The status and likely impact of existing and potential new combined hepatitis B vaccines were broadly considered at the Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board (VHPB) meeting in Malta, October 2001. The currently available and/or licensed combined hepatitis B vaccines in Europe and the prospects for further such vaccines were reviewed. Data on the safety, immunogenicity, and European licensing status and availability of haxavalent vaccines combining hepatitis B (HepB), Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib), diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (acellular) (DTPa), and inactivated poliovirus (IPV) antigens were presented. Finally, the impact of the availability of combined hepatitis B vaccines on hepatitis B immunisation programmes in Europe were examined and the added value of combined hepatitis B vaccines globally was estimated.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗