Dichotomising continuous data while retaining statistical power using a distributional approach

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 31, Issue 26, 2012, Pages 3089-3103

  Peacock, J L ^a   Sauzet, O ^b   Ewings, S M ^b   Kerry, S M ^c  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^c QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

CI; Dichotomisation; Normal distribution; Statistical power

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG USE; HUMAN; KERNEL METHOD; LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; RISK; RISK FACTOR; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; SMOKING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; URINARY TRACT INFECTION;

BIOMETRY; BIOSTATISTICS; BIRTH WEIGHT; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; ODDS RATIO; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS, INFECTIOUS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS; SAMPLE SIZE; SMOKING; URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS;

EID: 84867529345     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5354     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Senn S. Disappointing dichotomies. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2003; 2(4):239-240.
2. Altman DG, Royston P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ 2006; 332(7549):1080.
3. Ragland DR. Dichotomizing continuous outcome variables: dependence of the magnitude of association and statistical power on the cutpoint. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass) 1992; 3(5):434-440.
4. Deyi BA, Kosinski AS, Snapinn SM. Power considerations when a continuous outcome variable is dichotomized. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1998; 8(2):337-352.
5. Fedorov V, Mannino F, Zhang R. Consequences of dichotomization. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 8(1):50-61.
6. Senn S, Julious S. Measurement in clinical trials: a neglected issue for statisticians? Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28(26):3189-3209.
7. Farewell VT, Tom BDM, Royston P. The impact of dichotomization on the efficiency of testing for an interaction effect in exponential family models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2004; 99(467):822-831.
8. Royston P, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W. Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25(1):127-141.
9. Streiner DL. Breaking up is hard to do: the heartbreak of dichotomizing continuous data. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie 2002; 47(3):262-266.
10. Suissa S. Binary methods for continuous outcomes-a parametric alternative. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1991; 44(3):241-248.
11. Borm GF, Munneke M, Lemmers O, van Zuijlen M. An efficient test for the analysis of dichotomized variables when the reliability is known. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26(18):3498-3510.
12. Chinn S. A simple method for converting an odds ratio to effect size for use in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19(22):3127-3131.
13. Moser BK, Coombs LP. Odds ratios for a continuous outcome variable without dichotomizing. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23(12):1843-1860.
14. Senn S. U is for unease: reasons for mistrusting overlap measures for reporting clinical trials. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2011; 3(2):302-309.
15. Casella G, Berger RL. Statistical Inference, Wadsworth and Brooks/Cole: Pacific Grove, CA, 1990.
16. Fleiss JL, Tytun A, Ury HK. A simple approximation for calculating sample sizes for comparing independent proportions. Biometrics 1980; 36(2):343-346.
17. Julious SA. Sample Sizes for Clinical Trials, Chapman and Hall: London, 2009.
18. Peacock JL, Cook DG, Carey IM, Jarvis MJ, Bryant AE, Anderson HR, Bland JM. Maternal cotinine level during pregnancy and birth weight for gestational age. International Journal of Epidemiology 1998; 27(4):647-656.
19. Rocha RCL, deSouza E, Soares EP, Nogueira ES, ChamboFilho A, Guazzelli CAF. Prematurity and low birth weight among Brazilian adolescents and young adults. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology 2010; 23(3):142-145.
20. Chen YK, Chen SF, Li HC, Lin HC. No increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with urinary tract infections: a nationwide population-based study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2010; 89(7):882-888.
21. Pinto SM, Dodd S, Walkinshaw SA, Siney C, Kakkar P, Mousa HA. Substance abuse during pregnancy: effect on pregnancy outcomes. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 2010; 150(2):137-141.
22. Rose G. Sick individuals and sick populations. International Journal of Epidemiology 1985; 14(1):32-38.