ArticleStatistics in medicine2021
Two-wave two-phase outcome-dependent sampling designs, with applications to longitudinal binary data.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconciling Binary Replicates: Beyond the Average.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Overcoming data challenges through enriched validation and targeted sampling to measure whole-person health in electronic health records.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2025Article
- Modern sources of controls in case-control studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Weight calibration in the joint modelling of medical cost and mortality.Statistical methods in medical research · 2024Article
- Article
- Practical strategies for operationalizing optimal allocation in stratified cluster-based outcome-dependent sampling designs.Statistics in medicine · 2023Article
- Optimal sampling allocation for outcome-dependent designs in cluster-correlated data settings.Statistical methods in medical research · 2022Article
- Optimal allocation in stratified cluster-based outcome-dependent sampling designs.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two-phase outcome-dependent sampling (ODS) designs are useful when resource constraints prohibit expensive exposure ascertainment on all study subjects. One class of ODS designs for longitudinal binary data stratifies subjects into three strata according to those who experience the event at none, some, or all follow-up times. For time-varying covariate effects, exclusively selecting subjects with response variation can yield highly efficient estimates. However, if interest lies in the association of a time-invariant covariate, or the joint associations of time-varying and time-invariant covariates with the outcome, then the optimal design is unknown. Therefore, we propose a class of two-wave two-phase ODS designs for longitudinal binary data. We split the second-phase sample selection into two waves, between which an interim design evaluation analysis is conducted. The interim design evaluation analysis uses first-wave data to conduct a simulation-based search for the optimal second-wave design that will improve the likelihood of study success. Although we focus on longitudinal binary response data, the proposed design is general and can be applied to other response distributions. We believe that the proposed designs can be useful in settings where (1) the expected second-phase sample size is fixed and one must tailor stratum-specific sampling probabilities to maximize estimation efficiency, or (2) relative sampling probabilities are fixed across sampling strata and one must tailor sample size to achieve a desired precision. We describe the class of designs, examine finite sampling operating characteristics, and apply the designs to an exemplar longitudinal cohort study, the Lung Health Study.
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.