Comparison of models for analyzing two-group, cross-sectional data with a Gaussian outcome subject to a detection limit

A potential difficulty in the analysis of biomarker data occurs when data are subject to a detection limit. This detection limit is often defined as the point at which the true values cannot be measured reliably. Multiple, regression-type models designed to analyze such data exist. Studies have comp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inStatistical methods in medical research Vol. 25; no. 6; pp. 2733 - 2749
Main Authors Wiegand, Ryan E, Rose, Charles E, Karon, John M
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.12.2016
Sage Publications Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0962-2802
1477-0334
1477-0334
DOI10.1177/0962280214531684

Cover

More Information
Summary:A potential difficulty in the analysis of biomarker data occurs when data are subject to a detection limit. This detection limit is often defined as the point at which the true values cannot be measured reliably. Multiple, regression-type models designed to analyze such data exist. Studies have compared the bias among such models, but few have compared their statistical power. This simulation study provides a comparison of approaches for analyzing two-group, cross-sectional data with a Gaussian-distributed outcome by exploring statistical power and effect size confidence interval coverage of four models able to be implemented in standard software. We found using a Tobit model fit by maximum likelihood provides the best power and coverage. An example using human immunodeficiency virus type 1 ribonucleic acid data is used to illustrate the inferential differences in these models.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0962-2802
1477-0334
1477-0334
DOI:10.1177/0962280214531684