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...
Saved in:
| Published in | Statistical methods in medical research Vol. 25; no. 6; pp. 2733 - 2749 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors | , , |
| Format | Journal Article |
| Language | English |
| Published |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01.12.2016
Sage Publications Ltd |
| Subjects | |
| Online Access | Get full text |
| ISSN | 0962-2802 1477-0334 1477-0334 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0962280214531684 |
Cover
| 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 |