Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38115074›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2023

Statistical recommendations for count, binary, and ordinal data in rare disease cross-over trials.

Martin Geroldinger, Johan Verbeeck, Andrew C Hooker, Konstantin E Thiel, Geert Molenberghs, Joakim Nyberg, Johann Bauer, Martin Laimer, Verena Wally, Arne C Bathke and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Martin GeroldingerTeam Biostatistics and Big Medical Data, IDA Lab Salzburg, Paracelsus Medical University, Strubergasse 21, Salzburg, 5020, Austria. martin.geroldinger@pmu.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0002-7858-323X
Johan VerbeeckI-BioStat, Hasselt University, Martelarenlaan 42, 3500, Hasselt, Belgium.
Andrew C HookerDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, 751 24, Uppsala, Sweden.
Konstantin E ThielTeam Biostatistics and Big Medical Data, IDA Lab Salzburg, Paracelsus Medical University, Strubergasse 21, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.
Geert MolenberghsI-BioStat, Hasselt University, Martelarenlaan 42, 3500, Hasselt, Belgium.
Joakim NybergDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, 751 24, Uppsala, Sweden.
Johann BauerDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.
Martin LaimerDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.
Verena WallyEB House Austria, Research Program for Molecular Therapy of Genodermatoses, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.
Arne C BathkeIntelligent Data Analytics (IDA) Lab Salzburg, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Human Interfaces, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.
Georg ZimmermannTeam Biostatistics and Big Medical Data, IDA Lab Salzburg, Paracelsus Medical University, Strubergasse 21, Salzburg, 5020, Austria.

Funding

H2020 Societal Challenges 825575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecommendations for statistical methods in rare disease trials are scarce, especially for cross-over designs. As a result various state-of-the-art methodologies were compared as neutrally as possible using an illustrative data set from epidermolysis bullosa research to build recommendations for count, binary, and ordinal outcome variables. For this purpose, parametric (model averaging), semiparametric (generalized estimating equations type [GEE-like]) and nonparametric (generalized pairwise comparisons [GPC] and a marginal model implemented in the R package nparLD) methods were chosen by an international consortium of statisticians.

resultsIt was found that there is no uniformly best method for the aforementioned types of outcome variables, but in particular situations, there are methods that perform better than others. Especially if maximizing power is the primary goal, the prioritized unmatched GPC method was able to achieve particularly good results, besides being appropriate for prioritizing clinically relevant time points. Model averaging led to favorable results in some scenarios especially within the binary outcome setting and, like the GEE-like semiparametric method, also allows for considering period and carry-over effects properly. Inference based on the nonparametric marginal model was able to achieve high power, especially in the ordinal outcome scenario, despite small sample sizes due to separate testing of treatment periods, and is suitable when longitudinal and interaction effects have to be considered.

conclusionOverall, a balance has to be found between achieving high power, accounting for cross-over, period, or carry-over effects, and prioritizing clinically relevant time points.

Indexed as

Rare DiseasesResearch DesignStatistics as TopicCross-Over StudiesHumansSample SizeCross-overEpidermolysis bullosa simplexGEE-like semiparametric modelGeneralized pairwise comparison (GPC)GuidanceModel averagingNparLDRare DiseasesRecommendationRepeated measuresSmall sample size

Identifiers

PMID38115074
PMCPMC10729462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.