Analyses of Covariance Comparing k means adjusting for 1 or more other variables (covariates) Ho: u 1 = u 2 = u 3 (Adjusting for X) Combines ANOVA and.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Qualitative predictor variables
Advertisements

Logistic Regression I Outline Introduction to maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) Introduction to Generalized Linear Models The simplest logistic regression.
Update on Anti-platelets Gabriel A. Vidal, MD Vascular Neurology Ochsner Medical Center October 14 th, 2009.
Observational Studies Based on Rosenbaum (2002) David Madigan Rosenbaum, P.R. (2002). Observational Studies (2 nd edition). Springer.
April 25 Exam April 27 (bring calculator with exp) Cox-Regression
Header= Verdana 28 pt., Red 1 STA 517 – Chapter 3: Inference for Contingency Tables 3. Inference for Contingency Tables 3.1 Confidence Intervals for Association.
PH6415 Review Questions. 2 Question 1 A journal article reports a 95%CI for the relative risk (RR) of an event (treatment versus control as (0.55, 0.97).
Chapter 11 Survival Analysis Part 2. 2 Survival Analysis and Regression Combine lots of information Combine lots of information Look at several variables.
BS704 Class 7 Hypothesis Testing Procedures
Generalized Linear Models
Women’s Health Study: Vitamin E in Primary Prevention Presented at American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions 2005 Presented by Dr. Julie E. Buring.
Marshall University School of Medicine Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology BMS 617 Lecture 12: Multiple and Logistic Regression Marshall University.
Women's Health Study: Low-Dose Aspirin in Primary Prevention Presented at American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions 2005 Presented by Dr. Dr.
HSTAT1101: 27. oktober 2004 Odd Aalen
Results of Monotherapy in ALLHAT: On-treatment Analyses ALLHAT Outcomes for participants who received no step-up drugs.
Multiple Choice Questions for discussion
Pravastatin in Elderly Individuals at Risk of Vascular Disease Presented at Late Breaking Clinical Trials AHA 2002 PROSPER.
Lecture 17 (Oct 28,2004)1 Lecture 17: Prevention of bias in RCTs Statistical/analytic issues in RCTs –Measures of effect –Precision/hypothesis testing.
April 11 Logistic Regression –Modeling interactions –Analysis of case-control studies –Data presentation.
Please turn off cell phones, pagers, etc. The lecture will begin shortly.
Measures of Association
Management of Elevated Cholesterol in the Primary Prevention Group of Adult Japanese (MEGA) Trial MEGA Trial Presented at The American Heart Association.
April 6 Logistic Regression –Estimating probability based on logistic model –Testing differences among multiple groups –Assumptions for model.
Aim To determine the effects of a Coversyl- based blood pressure lowering regimen on the risk of recurrent stroke among patients with a history of stroke.
Different Distributions David Purdie. Topics Application of GEE to: Binary outcomes: – logistic regression Events over time (rate): –Poisson regression.
LOGISTIC REGRESSION A statistical procedure to relate the probability of an event to explanatory variables Used in epidemiology to describe and evaluate.
Introduction to Survival Analysis Utah State University January 28, 2008 Bill Welbourn.
April 4 Logistic Regression –Lee Chapter 9 –Cody and Smith 9:F.
Logistic and Nonlinear Regression Logistic Regression - Dichotomous Response variable and numeric and/or categorical explanatory variable(s) –Goal: Model.
R Programming Risk & Relative Risk 1. Session 2 Overview 1.Risk 2.Relative Risk 3.Percent Increase/Decrease Risk 2.
Assessing Binary Outcomes: Logistic Regression Peter T. Donnan Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Statistics for Health Research.
MBP1010 – Lecture 8: March 1, Odds Ratio/Relative Risk Logistic Regression Survival Analysis Reading: papers on OR and survival analysis (Resources)
LIPID: Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease Purpose To determine whether pravastatin will reduce coronary mortality and morbidity.
March 28, 30 Return exam Analyses of covariance 2-way ANOVA Analyses of binary outcomes.
Lecture 9: Analysis of intervention studies Randomized trial - categorical outcome Measures of risk: –incidence rate of an adverse event (death, etc) It.
Introduction to Inference: Confidence Intervals and Hypothesis Testing Presentation 4 First Part.
March 30 More examples of case-control studies General I x J table Chi-square tests.
Logistic Regression. Linear regression – numerical response Logistic regression – binary categorical response eg. has the disease, or unaffected by the.
A first order model with one binary and one quantitative predictor variable.
C-1 Efficacy of the Combination: Meta-Analyses Donald A. Berry, Ph.D. Frank T. McGraw Memorial Chair of Cancer Research University of Texas M.D. Anderson.
4S: Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study
Logistic regression (when you have a binary response variable)
Introduction to Biostatistics, Harvard Extension School, Fall, 2005 © Scott Evans, Ph.D.1 Contingency Tables.
The MICRO-HOPE. Microalbuminuria, Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Reference Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation.
Date of download: 5/30/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Aspirin for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Events.
Logistic Regression Logistic Regression - Binary Response variable and numeric and/or categorical explanatory variable(s) –Goal: Model the probability.
Flow Diagram of the Trial Selection Process Jeffrey S. Berger et al, JAMA. 2006;295:
Date of download: 6/21/2016 Copyright © The American College of Cardiology. All rights reserved. From: Aspirin Therapy in Primary Cardiovascular Disease.
The AURORA Trial Source: Holdaas H, Holme I, Schmieder RE, et al. Rosuvastatin in diabetic hemodialysis patient. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;22(7):1335–1341.
Date of download: 6/21/2016 Copyright © The American College of Cardiology. All rights reserved. From: Smoking Is Associated With Adverse Clinical Outcomes.
Methods and Statistical analysis. A brief presentation. Markos Kashiouris, M.D.
Summary of “A randomized trial of standard versus intensive blood-pressure control” The SPRINT Research Group, NEJM, DOI: /NEJMoa Downloaded.
HelpDesk Answers Synthesizing the Evidence
March 28 Analyses of binary outcomes 2 x 2 tables
Low-Dose Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis  Stavros Stavrakis, MD  The American Journal.
April 18 Intro to survival analysis Le 11.1 – 11.2
LEADER trial: Primary Outcome
Basic Statistics Overview
SPIRE Program: Studies of PCSK9 Inhibition and the Reduction of Vascular Events Unanticipated attenuation of LDL-c lowering response to humanized PCSK9.
Generalized Linear Models
Multiple logistic regression
Lecture 7 The Odds/ Log Odds Ratios
The Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET)
Narrative Reviews Limitations: Subjectivity inherent:
P2Y12 blockade versus placebo; risk ratio with 95% CIs for the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and.
Measures of risk and association
Berger JS, et al. JAMA 2009;301:
Women’s Health Study: Baseline Characteristics Part 1
SPIRE Program: Studies of PCSK9 Inhibition and the Reduction of Vascular Events Unanticipated attenuation of LDL-c lowering response to humanized PCSK9.
EMPA-REG OUTCOME: Cumulative incidence of the primary outcome
Presentation transcript:

Analyses of Covariance Comparing k means adjusting for 1 or more other variables (covariates) Ho: u 1 = u 2 = u 3 (Adjusting for X) Combines ANOVA and regression –u y = u k +  X Assumptions are same as ANOVA + regression –Y normally distributed, constant variance across groups –Slope  the same for each group

SAS Code PROC GLM; CLASS group; MODEL chol12 = group cholbl/SS3 SOLUTION; MEANS group; LSMEANS group; ESTIMATE ‘Adjusted Mean Dif' group 1 -1; RUN;

Adjusted Means Computation Observations YBAR(A) i = YBAR i –  XBAR i – XBAR) 1)If  then adjusted mean equals unadjusted mean 2)If mean of X is same for all group then adjusted mean equals unadjusted mean

Computing the Adjusted Means 12-mo Avg.Baseline Avg. Diuretic Placebo Total227.0  =0.894Regression slope of 12-month cholesterol on baseline cholesterol YBAR(A) (Diur)= – (230.7 – 227.0) = – (3.7) = YBAR(A) (Plac)= – (224.9 – 227.0) = – (-3.7) =

Summary of Analyses of Continuous Variables Y is continuous variable Estimate a single mean  Compare 2 means     Compare k means  1,  2,  3, …  k Model means as function of 1 or more variables (LR) –Y =     X  +   X 

Summary of Analyses of Continuous Variables Hypothesis testing Ho:  0 Ho:     Ho:        k Ho:  j = 0

Summary of Analyses of Continuous Variables Confidence intervals

Analyses of Binary Outcomes Much of bio-medical data relates to analyses of binary outcomes: –Cancer (yes/no) –Survival (yes/no) –Had side-effect (yes/no) –Currently smoke cigarettes Social Sciences: –Divorced (yes/no) –Return to prison (yes/no) Political: –Favor a candidate (yes/no) –State has capital punishment (yes/no)

Analyses of Binary Variables Y has two outcomes (yes/no or 1/0) Estimate a single proportion  Compare 2 proportions     Compare k proportions  1,  2,  3, …  k Model probability as function of 1 or more variables –Y =     X  +   X 

Binary Outcomes Binary outcomes (Y=0 or 1) can be thought of in terms of probabilities: P (Y=1) =  P (Y=0) = (1 –  The ratio of the P(Y=1) to P(Y=0) is the odds  Odds (Y=1 versus Y = 0) = P(Y=1)/P(Y=0) =  (1 – 

Example Y = 1 indicates your horse winning the race P (Y=1) = 0.20 P (Y=0) = (1 – 0.20) = 0.80 What is the Odds of winning versus losing. Odds = P(Winning)/P(Losing) = 0.20/0.80 = 0.25 or ¼ In gambling terms the odds are 4 to 1.

Relationship Between Probability and Odds  Odds (o=  For small values the probability and the odds are close in value

Comparing Two Groups With Binary Outcomes  1 = probability of Y=1 for group 1  2 = probability of Y=1 for group 2 Ways to summarize the probability differences: 1)  1 -  2 difference in probabilities 2)  1 /  2 ratio of probabilities (Relative Risk) 3) (  1 /(1-  1 )/ ratio of odds (Relative Odds) (  2 /(1-  2 )

Example Group 1: Smokers Group 2: Non-smokers Y = 1 indicates cough upon awakening    0.30    0.20     = 0.10     = 0.30/0.20 = 1.50     = (.30/.70)/(.20/.80) = 0.429/0.250 = 1.71

Interpretation of Relative Risks Group 1: Smokers Group 2: Non-smokers RR = 1.50 There is a 50% increased risk of cough for smokers compared to non-smokers. Smokers are at a 50% increased risk of cough compared to non-smokers

Interpretation of Relative Risks Changing the Reference Group Group 1: Non-Smokers Group 2: Smokers RR = 0.67 (1/1.50 or.20/.30) There is a 33% decreased risk of cough for non- smokers compared to smokers. Non-smokers are at a 33% lower risk of cough compared to smokers.

Results: During follow-up, 477 major cardiovascular events were confirmed in the aspirin group, as compared with 522 in the placebo group, for a nonsignificant reduction in risk with aspirin of 9 percent (relative risk, 0.91; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.80 to 1.03; P=0.13). With regard to individual end points, there was a 17 percent reduction in the risk of stroke in the aspirin group, as compared with the placebo group (relative risk, 0.83; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.99; P=0.04), owing to a 24 percent reduction in the risk of ischemic stroke (relative risk, 0.76; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.63 to 0.93; P=0.009) and a nonsignificant increase in the risk of hemorrhagic stroke (relative risk, 1.24; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.87; P=0.31). As compared with placebo, aspirin had no significant effect on the risk of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (relative risk, 1.02; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.25; P=0.83) or death from cardiovascular causes (relative risk, 0.95; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.22; P=0.68). Gastrointestinal bleeding requiring transfusion was more frequent in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.40; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.83; P=0.02). NEJM March 2005: A Randomized Trial of Low-Dose Aspirin in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women

Relationship Between Relative Risk and Relative Odds RO = RR x (1-  2 ) / (1-  1 ) If  1 and  2 are small (<0.10) then –RO ~ RR –Because of this relative risk and relative odds are sometimes interpreted in the same way

Example RR = 2.0 and RR=0.5 RR = 2.0  1  2 Odds Ratio RR = 0.5  1  2 Odds Ratio

Why Use Ratios In most cases the probability of an event is dependent on length of time  time) Using ratios removes time as a factor    t  prob. of developing lung cancer for smokers    t  prob. of developing lung cancer for non-smokers –RR =    t    t  Using differences does not remove time as a factor DIF =    t    t 

Comparing Studies With Different Follow-up Time Study 1 follows patients for 5 years:    5  prob. of developing lung cancer for smokers    prob. of developing lung cancer for non-smokers –RR =  Study 2 follow patients for 30 years:    30  prob. of developing lung cancer for smokers    30  prob. of developing lung cancer for non- smokers –RR = 

Hypothesis Testing Confidence Intervals Ho:  1 =  2 Ha:  1 ≠  2 Estimate  1 with p 1 = number with condition/total in group 1 Estimate  2 with p 2 = number with condition/total in group 2 p 1 -p 2 is point estimate of  1 -  2

Proportions for two groups 95% CI for difference in proportions:

Proportions for two groups Example 50 men with 13 smokers 50 women with 10 smokers p 1 = 13/50 = 0.26, p 2 = 10/50 = 0.20 SE = sqrt( ) = % CI for difference = 0.06 ± 1.96* ± (-0.105, 0.225) We do not have evidence that the proportion of smokers is different for men and women

Estimation a Single Proportion Example N=625 sampled; X=# favor X = 300 p = 300/625 = 0.48 SE = SQRT( (0.48)(0.52)/625) = % CI: =0.48 ± 1.96* ± 0.04 (0.44, 0.52)