Power of the Cochran-Armitage trend test when exposure scores are based on empirical quantiles of exposure

被引:0
|
作者
Li, Huilin [1 ]
Gail, Mitchell H. [2 ]
机构
[1] NYU, Sch Med, Div Biostat, New York, NY 10016 USA
[2] NCI, Biostat Branch, Div Canc Epidemiol & Genet, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
关键词
Case-control design; Cochran-Armitage trend test; Cohort design; Exposure assessment; Power;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Epidemiologists often categorize exposures based on quantiles of exposure and use the Cochran-Armitage trend test based on such categories to detect associations between disease and exposure. Power calculations typically assume that the population quantiles are known, but in practice quantiles are often estimated from the sample data. We evaluated the power of the Cochran-Armitage trend test for cohort designs and for case-control designs in which sample quantiles of exposure in the cohort or in controls from a case-control study, respectively, are used to define the cut-points that separate exposure score categories. We give the asymptotic formulas for size and power for the Cochran-Armitage test based on empirical quantiles separately for cohort and case-control designs, together with efficient simulation methods to estimate size and power. Numerical results indicate that estimation of sample quantiles has only a slight effect on power for cohort studies with at least four categories or with more than 280 subjects. However, estimating quantiles can reduce power appreciably in smaller studies with fewer than four exposure categories. For case-control studies of rare diseases, the power loss is limited with more than 120 cases plus controls if the odds ratio comparing the highest exposure category to the lowest category is greater than 0.5. However, if that odd ratio is smaller than 0.5, only samples with more than 360 cases plus controls can guarantee a small loss of power, and increasing the number of exposure categories does not eliminate the loss of power.
引用
收藏
页码:237 / 251
页数:15
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] On the power of the Cochran-Armitage test for trend in the presence of misclassification
    Buonaccorsi, John P.
    Laake, Petter
    Veierod, Marit B.
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2014, 23 (03) : 218 - 243
  • [2] Exact power and sample-sire computations for the Cochran-Armitage trend test
    Mehta, CR
    Patel, NR
    Senchaudhuri, P
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 1998, 54 (04) : 1615 - 1621
  • [3] An exact Cochran-Armitage test for trend when dose-response shapes an a priori unknown
    Neuhäuser, M
    Hothorn, LA
    [J]. COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS & DATA ANALYSIS, 1999, 30 (04) : 403 - 412
  • [4] THE COCHRAN-ARMITAGE TEST TO ESTIMATE THE SAMPLE SIZE FOR TREND OF PROPORTIONS FOR BIOLOGICAL DATA
    Tekindal, Mustafa Agah
    Gullu, Ozlem
    Yazici, Ayse Canan
    Yavuz, Yasemin
    [J]. TURKISH JOURNAL OF FIELD CROPS, 2016, 21 (02) : 286 - 297
  • [5] The size of the Cochran-Armitage trend test in 2xC contingency tables
    Kang, Seung-Ho
    Lee, Jae-Won
    [J]. JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PLANNING AND INFERENCE, 2007, 137 (06) : 1851 - 1861
  • [6] Differentiating the Cochran-Armitage Trend Test and Pearson's χ2 Test: Location and Dispersion
    Zhou, Zhengyang
    Ku, Hung-Chih
    Huang, Zhipeng
    Xing, Guan
    Xing, Chao
    [J]. ANNALS OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2017, 81 (05) : 184 - 189
  • [7] An enhanced version of Cochran-Armitage trend test for genome-wide association studies
    Ghodsi, Mansi
    Amiri, Saeid
    Hassani, Hossein
    Ghodsi, Zara
    [J]. META GENE, 2016, 9 : 225 - 229
  • [8] Power and sample size evaluation for the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel mean score (Wilcoxon rank sum) test and the Cochran-Armitage test for trend
    Lachin, John M.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2011, 30 (25) : 3057 - 3066
  • [9] The effects of SNP genotyping errors on the power of the cochran-armitage linear trend test for case/control association studies
    Ahn, Kwangmi
    Haynes, Chad
    Kim, Wonkuk
    St. Fleur, Rose
    Gordon, Derek
    Finch, Stephen J.
    [J]. ANNALS OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2007, 71 : 249 - U4
  • [10] Evaluation of animal carcinogenicity studies: Cochran-Armitage trend test vs. multiple contrast tests
    Hothorn, LA
    Bretz, F
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 42 (05) : 553 - 567