IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ijbist/v7y2011i1n27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relative Risk Estimation in Cluster Randomized Trials: A Comparison of Generalized Estimating Equation Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Yelland Lisa N

    (University of Adelaide)

  • Salter Amy B

    (University of Adelaide)

  • Ryan Philip

    (University of Adelaide)

Abstract

Relative risks have become a popular measure of treatment effect for binary outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relative risks can be estimated directly using log binomial regression but the model may fail to converge. Alternative methods are available for estimating relative risks but these have generally only been evaluated for independent data. As some of these methods are now being applied in cluster RCTs, investigation of their performance in this context is needed. We compare log binomial regression and three alternative methods (expanded logistic regression, log Poisson regression and log normal regression) for estimating relative risks in cluster RCTs. Clustering is taken into account using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) with an independence or exchangeable working correlation structure. The results of our large simulation study show that the log binomial GEE generally performs well for clustered data but suffers from convergence problems, as expected. Both the log Poisson GEE and log normal GEE have advantages in certain settings in terms of type I error, bias and coverage. The expanded logistic GEE can perform poorly and is sensitive to the chosen working correlation structure. Conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment often differ depending on the method used, highlighting the need to pre-specify an analysis approach. We recommend pre-specifying that either the log Poisson GEE or log normal GEE will be used in the event that the log binomial GEE fails to converge.

Suggested Citation

  • Yelland Lisa N & Salter Amy B & Ryan Philip, 2011. "Relative Risk Estimation in Cluster Randomized Trials: A Comparison of Generalized Estimating Equation Methods," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:7:y:2011:i:1:n:27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ijb.2011.7.issue-1/ijb.2011.7.1.1323/ijb.2011.7.1.1323.xml?format=INT
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yelland Lisa N & Salter Amy B & Ryan Philip, 2011. "Relative Risk Estimation in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Comparison of Methods for Independent Observations," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-31, January.
    2. Lloyd A. Mancl & Timothy A. DeRouen, 2001. "A Covariance Estimator for GEE with Improved Small-Sample Properties," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 126-134, March.
    3. Bing Lu & John S. Preisser & Bahjat F. Qaqish & Chirayath Suchindran & Shrikant I. Bangdiwala & Mark Wolfson, 2007. "A Comparison of Two Bias-Corrected Covariance Estimators for Generalized Estimating Equations," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 935-941, September.
    4. Hammill, Bradley G. & Preisser, John S., 2006. "A SAS/IML software program for GEE and regression diagnostics," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 1197-1212, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:7:y:2011:i:1:n:27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.