ArticleStatistics in medicine2017
On the analysis of very small samples of Gaussian repeated measurements: an alternative approach.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of very small samples of Gaussian repeated measurements can be challenging. First, due to a very small number of independent subjects contributing outcomes over time, statistical power can be quite small. Second, nuisance covariance parameters must be appropriately accounted for in the analysis in order to maintain the nominal test size. However, available statistical strategies that ensure valid statistical inference may lack power, whereas more powerful methods may have the potential for inflated test sizes. Therefore, we explore an alternative approach to the analysis of very small samples of Gaussian repeated measurements, with the goal of maintaining valid inference while also improving statistical power relative to other valid methods. This approach uses generalized estimating equations with a bias-corrected empirical covariance matrix that accounts for all small-sample aspects of nuisance correlation parameter estimation in order to maintain valid inference. Furthermore, the approach utilizes correlation selection strategies with the goal of choosing the working structure that will result in the greatest power. In our study, we show that when accurate modeling of the nuisance correlation structure impacts the efficiency of regression parameter estimation, this method can improve power relative to existing methods that yield valid inference. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.