IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lstaxx/v46y2017i14p6743-6753.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sample size estimation for a two-group comparison of repeated count outcomes using GEE

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Lou
  • Jing Cao
  • Song Zhang
  • Chul Ahn

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials with count measurements as the primary outcome are common in various medical areas such as seizure counts in epilepsy trials, or relapse counts in multiple sclerosis trials. Controlled clinical trials frequently use a conventional parallel-group design that assigns subjects randomly to one of two treatment groups and repeatedly evaluates them at baseline and intervals across a treatment period of a fixed duration. The primary interest is to compare the rates of change between treatment groups. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) have been widely used to compare rates of change between treatment groups because of its robustness to misspecification of the true correlation structure. In this paper, we derive a sample size formula for comparing the rates of change between two groups in a repeatedly measured count outcome using GEE. The sample size formula incorporates general missing patterns such as independent missing and monotone missing, and general correlation structures such as AR(1) and compound symmetry (CS). The performance of the sample size formula is evaluated through simulation studies. Sample size estimation is illustrated by a clinical trial example from epilepsy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Lou & Jing Cao & Song Zhang & Chul Ahn, 2017. "Sample size estimation for a two-group comparison of repeated count outcomes using GEE," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(14), pages 6743-6753, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lstaxx:v:46:y:2017:i:14:p:6743-6753
    DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2015.1134572
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03610926.2015.1134572
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03610926.2015.1134572?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:taf:lstaxx:v:46:y:2017:i:14:p:6743-6753. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lsta .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.