POWER AND SAMPLE-SIZE EVALUATION FOR THE MCNEMAR TEST WITH APPLICATION TO MATCHED CASE-CONTROL STUDIES

被引:30
作者
LACHIN, JM
机构
[1] Biostatistics Center, Department of Statistics, George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland, 20852
关键词
D O I
10.1002/sim.4780110909
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Various expressions have appeared for sample size calculation based on the power function of McNemar's test for paired or matched proportions, especially with reference to a matched case-control study. These differ principally with respect to the expression for the variance of the statistic under the alternative hypothesis. In addition to the conditional power function, I identify and compare four distinct unconditional expressions. I show that the unconditional calculation of Schlesselman for the matched case-control study can be expressed as a first-order unconditional calculation as described by Miettinen. Corrections to Schlesselman's unconditional expression presented by Fleiss and Levin and by Dupont, which use different models to describe exposure association among matched cases and controls, are also equivalent to a first-order unconditional calculation. I present a simplification of these corrections that directly provides the underlying table of cell probabilities, from which one can perform any of the alternative sample size calculations. Also, I compare thc four unconditional sample size expressions relative to the exact power function. The conclusion is that Miettinen's first-order expression tends to underestimate sample size, while his second-order expression is usually fairly accurate, though possibly slightly anti-conservative. A multinomial-based expression presented by Connor, among others, is also fairly accurate and is usually slightly conservative. Finally, a local unconditional expression of Mitra, among others, tends to be excessively conservative.
引用
收藏
页码:1239 / 1251
页数:13
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
McNemar Q., Note on the sampling error of the differences between correlated proportions or percentages, Psychometrika, 12, pp. 153-157, (1947)
[2]  
Miettinen O.S., The matched pairs design in the case of all‐or‐none responses, Biometrics, 24, pp. 339-352, (1968)
[3]  
Mitra S.K., On the limiting power function of the frequency chi‐square test, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 29, pp. 1221-1233, (1958)
[4]  
Connor R.J., Sample size for testing differences in proportions for the paired‐sample design, Biometrics, 43, pp. 207-211, (1987)
[5]  
Connett J.E., Smith J.A., McHugh R.B., Sample size and power for pair‐matched case‐control studies, Statistics in Medicine, 6, pp. 53-59, (1987)
[6]  
Schlesselman J.J., Case‐Control Studies, (1982)
[7]  
Fleiss J.L., Levin B., Sample size determination in studies with matched pairs, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 41, pp. 727-730, (1988)
[8]  
Dupont W.D., Power calculations for matched case‐control studies, Biometrics, 44, pp. 1157-1168, (1988)
[9]  
Elashoff J.D., ‘Sample size issues for inferences about correlated proportions’, presented to the 1991 joint annual meeting of the Society for Clinical Trials and the International Society for Clinical Biostatistics,, Controlled Clinical Trials, 12, 669, (1991)
[10]  
Lachin J.M., Introduction to sample size determination and power analysis for clinical trials, Controlled Clinical Trials, 2, pp. 93-113, (1981)