ArticleThe international journal of biostatistics2014
Optimal design strategies for sibling studies with binary exposures.
Article in The international journal of biostatistics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular Risk Factor Disparities in Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer Compared With the General Population.JACC. CardioOncology · 2023Article
- Prospectively Predicting Adult Depressive Symptoms from Adolescent Peer Dysfunction: a Sibling Comparison Study.Research on child and adolescent psychopathology · 2022Article
- Whole-Genome Sequencing of Finnish Type 1 Diabetic Siblings Discordant for Kidney Disease Reveals DNA Variants associated with Diabetic Nephropathy.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2020Article
- The association between depressive mood and ischemic heart disease: a twin study.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2019Article
- Suicide Attempts and Completions among Mothers Whose Children Were Taken into Care by Child Protection Services: A Cohort Study Using Linkable Administrative Data.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2018Article
- Risk of hospitalization among survivors of childhood and adolescent acute lymphoblastic leukemia compared to siblings and a general population sample.Cancer epidemiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sibling studies have become increasingly popular because they provide better control over confounding by unmeasured family-level risk factors than can be obtained in standard cohort studies. However, little attention has been devoted to the development of efficient design strategies for sibling studies in terms of optimizing power. We here address this issue in commonly encountered types of sibling studies, allowing for continuous and binary outcomes and varying numbers of exposed and unexposed siblings. For continuous outcomes, we show that in families with sibling pairs, optimal study power is obtained by recruiting discordant (exposed-control) pairs of siblings. More generally, balancing the exposure status within each family as evenly as possible is shown to be optimal. For binary outcomes, we elucidate how the optimal strategy depends on the variation of the binary response; as the within-family correlation increases, the optimal strategy tends toward only recruiting discordant sibling pairs (as in the case of continuous outcomes). R code for obtaining the optimal strategies is included.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.