Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byVincent Gillingham Modified over 2 years ago

1
Comparing Margins of Multivariate Binary Data Bernhard Klingenberg Assoc. Prof. of Statistics Williams College, MA www.williams.edu/~bklingen

2
Outline Challenges: Associations of various degrees among binary variables Simultaneous Inference Sparse and/or unbalanced data, Test statistics with discrete support Asymptotic theory questionable Setup: Two indep. groups Response: Vector of k correlated binary variables (multivariate binary) Goal: Inference about k margins: Marginal Risk Differences Marginal Risk Ratios

3
Outline Motivating Examples From drug safety or animal toxicity/carcinogenicity studies Source: http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_advair.pdf

4
Source: http://www.pfizer.com/files/products/uspi_lipitor.pdf

5
Outline Example: AEs from a vaccine trial (flu shot): > head(Y1) # ACTIVE Treatment n1=1971 ID HEADACHE PAIN MYALGIA ARTHRALGIA MALAISE FATIGUE CHILLS 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 > head(Y2) # PLACEBO Treatment n2=1554 ID HEADACHE PAIN MYALGIA ARTHRALGIA MALAISE FATIGUE CHILLS 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

6
Notation and Setup k-dimensional response vectors: Group 1Group 2 Random sample in each group: Group 1Group 2 Joint distrib. in each group depends on 2 k -1 parameters Group 1Group 2

7
Comparing Margins Usually only interested in k margins. Group 1 Group 2 With just two (k=2) adverse events: Group 1 Group 2 NoYes No Yes Headache Pain NoYes No Yes Headache Pain

8
Comparing Margins Group1Group2Diff HEADACHE 0.2603 0.2407 0.0196 INJECTION SITE PAIN 0.6088 0.1384 0.4705 MYALGIA 0.2588 0.1088 0.1500 ARTHRALGIA 0.0893 0.0579 0.0314 MALAISE 0.2085 0.1332 0.0753 FATIGUE 0.2476 0.2098 0.0378 CHILLS 0.0928 0.0463 0.0465 Differences in marginal incidence rates between Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control)

9
Family of Tests j-th Null Hypothesis: Unrestricted and restricted MLEs:

10
Comparing Margins Estimates of marginal incidence rates and test statistics comparing Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) p-hat1p-hat2p-checkp-tildeWaldLocalGlobal HEADACHE0.2600.2410.2520.2601.341.331.32 PAIN0.6090.1380.4010.40533.4728.2928.26 MYALGIA0.2590.1090.1930.21011.8711.2110.85 ARTHRALGIA0.0890.0580.0760.0823.593.503.37 MALAISE0.2090.1330.1750.1965.995.845.60 FATIGUE0.2480.2100.2310.2442.662.642.59 CHILLS0.0930.0460.0720.0855.515.294.93

11
Asymptotic Test Note: Asymptotically, multivariate normal with covariance matrix determined by

12
Asymptotic Test Correlation Matrix: > round(cov2cor(Sigma),2) d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d1 1.00 0.04 0.29 0.26 0.38 0.41 0.27 d2 1.00 0.18 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.01 d3 1.00 0.46 0.35 0.36 0.30 d4 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.32 d5 1.00 0.51 0.44 d6 1.00 0.37 d7 1.00 > qmvnorm(0.95, tail="both.tails", corr=cov2cor(Sigma)) $quantile [1] 2.656222

13
Asymptotic Test Correlation Matrix: > round(cov2cor(Sigma),2) d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d1 1.00 0.06 0.33 0.28 0.41 0.41 0.29 d2 1.00 0.28 0.11 0.15 0.12 0.09 d3 1.00 0.46 0.41 0.36 0.35 d4 1.00 0.32 0.34 0.28 d5 1.00 0.50 0.47 d6 1.00 0.37 d7 1.00 > qmvnorm(0.95, tail="both.tails", corr=cov2cor(Sigma)) $quantile [1] 2.653783

14
Permutation Approach When testing can use Permutation Approach This assumes distributions are exchangeable (i.e. identical), much stronger assumption than under null Need two extra conditions: i.Sequences of all 0's as or more likely to occur under group 2 (Control) ii.Sequence of all 1's as or more likely to occur under group 1 (Treatment)

15
Permutation vs. Asymptotic Permutation vs. asymptotic distribution of Critical Value: ( = 0.05) c perm = 2.655 c asympt = 2.654 c Bonf = 2.690 Permut. Distr. Asympt. Distr.

16
Family of Tests Results: Raw and Adjusted P-values asymptoticexact DiffGlobalraw.Padj.P raw.P adj.P HEADACHE0.0201.320.18760.70610.18300.7013 PAIN0.47128.250.0000 MYALGIA0.15010.850.0000 ARTHRALGIA0.0313.370.00070.00510.00050.0032 MALAISE0.0755.600.0000 FATIGUE0.0382.590.00940.05890.00820.0516 CHILLS0.0474.930.0000

17
Simultaneous Confidence Intervals Invert family of tests: Confidence Region: Simplifies to simultaneous confidence intervals if

18
Simultaneous Confidence Intervals Results: Inverting Score test diff LB UB HEADACHE 0.0196-0.0196 0.0583 PAIN 0.4705 0.4323 0.5069 MYALGIA 0.1500 0.1162 0.1835 ARTHRALGIA 0.0314 0.0078 0.0547 MALAISE 0.0753 0.0416 0.1086 FATIGUE 0.0378-0.0002 0.0752 CHILLS 0.0465 0.0239 0.0692

19
Simultaneous Confidence Intervals We used (and recommend) score statistic Could use Wald statistic instead This is equivalent to fitting marginal model via GEE: asympt. multiv. normal, with (sandwich) covariance matrix (same as before) Use distribution of for multiplicity adjustment

20
Simultaneous Confidence Intervals Results: GEE approach (= inverting Wald test) diff LB UB HEADACHE 0.0196-0.0194 0.0586 PAIN 0.4705 0.4331 0.5078 MYALGIA 0.1500 0.1164 0.1836 ARTHRALGIA 0.0314 0.0082 0.0546 MALAISE 0.0753 0.0419 0.1087 FATIGUE 0.0378 0.0001 0.0755 CHILLS 0.0465 0.0241 0.0689

Similar presentations

OK

Chapter 9 Hypothesis Testing II. Chapter Outline Introduction Hypothesis Testing with Sample Means (Large Samples) Hypothesis Testing with Sample.

Chapter 9 Hypothesis Testing II. Chapter Outline Introduction Hypothesis Testing with Sample Means (Large Samples) Hypothesis Testing with Sample.

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on historical significance of taj mahal Ppt on global warming and its effects Ppt on kotak life insurance Ppt on primary data collection methods Transparent lcd display ppt online Ppt on managerial economics introduction Ppt on rc coupled amplifier definition Download ppt on modern periodic table Ppt on 21st century skills assessment Ppt on professional development