ArticleBiometrics2022
Sample size formula for general win ratio analysis.
Article in Biometrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- A Remote Chronic Disease Management Program to Improve Cardiovascular and Metabolic Outcomes in a Diverse Community-Based Diabetic Population: Study Design of the TAMIS Trial.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Trial
- Image optimization for low-doseEJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Empirical Comparison of Win Ratio and Joint Frailty Models for Recurrent Event Endpoints With Applications in Oncology and Cardiology.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Approximating win-loss probabilities based on the overall and event-free survival functions.Statistics & probability letters · 2025Article
- Efficient statistical analysis of trial designs: win ratio and related approaches for composite outcomes.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Article
- On restricted mean time in favor of treatment.Biometrics · 2023Article
- Power and Sample Size Calculations for the Restricted Mean Time Analysis of Prioritized Composite Endpoints.Statistics in biopharmaceutical research · 2023Article
- Stratified proportional win-fractions regression analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- The Relationship Between Demographic Variables and the Level of Job Satisfaction of Nurses Working in Psychiatric Teaching Hospitals in Baghdad.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
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
Originally proposed for the analysis of prioritized composite endpoints, the win ratio has now expanded into a broad class of methodology based on general pairwise comparisons. Complicated by the non-i.i.d. structure of the test statistic, however, sample size estimation for the win ratio has lagged behind. In this article, we develop general and easy-to-use formulas to calculate sample size for win ratio analysis of different outcome types. In a nonparametric setting, the null variance of the test statistic is derived using U-statistic theory in terms of a dispersion parameter called the standard rank deviation, an intrinsic characteristic of the null outcome distribution and the user-defined rule of comparison. The effect size can be hypothesized either on the original scale of the population win ratio, or on the scale of a "usual" effect size suited to the outcome type. The latter approach allows one to measure the effect size by, for example, odds/continuation ratio for totally/partially ordered outcomes and hazard ratios for composite time-to-event outcomes. Simulation studies show that the derived formulas provide accurate estimates for the required sample size across different settings. As illustration, real data from two clinical studies of hepatic and cardiovascular diseases are used as pilot data to calculate sample sizes for future trials.
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.