Assessment of statistical significance and clinical relevance

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 32, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1707-1719

  Kieser, Meinhard ^a   Friede, Tim ^b   Gondan, Matthias ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Clinical relevance; Effect size; Probabilistic index; Relative effect; Responder analysis; Sample size; Statistical significance

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL STUDY; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PROBABILITY; RANK SUM TEST; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STUDENT T TEST; STUDY DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BIOSURVEILLANCE; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DRUG DISCOVERY; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84876423773     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5634     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Brown DJ. ICH E9 guideline 'Statistical principles for clinical trials': a case study. Response to, A. Phillips and V. Haudiquet. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:13-17.
2. Jones PW. Interpreting thresholds for a clinically significant change in health status in asthma and COPD. European Respiratory Journal 2002; 19:396-404.
3. Kieser M, Hauschke D. Assessment of clinical relevance by considering point estimates and associated confidence intervals. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2005; 4:101-107.
4. Senn S. Disappointing dichotomies. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2003; 2:239-240.
5. Snapinn SM, Jiang Q. Responder analyses and the assessment of a clinically relevant treatment effect. Trials 2007; 8:31.
6. Leucht S, Davis JM, Engel RR, Kane JM, Wagenpfeil S. Defining 'response' in antipsychotic drug trials: recommendations for the use of scale-derived cutoffs. Neuropsychopharmacology 2007; 32:1903-1910.
7. Cohen J. The cost of dichotomization. Applied Psychological Measurement 1983; 7:249-253.
8. Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG. Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical, and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. British Medical Journal 1995; 311:1145-1148.
9. Deyi BA, Kosinski AS, Snapinn SM. Power considerations when a continuous outcome variable is dichotomized. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1998; 8:337-352.
10. MacCallum RC, Zhang S, Preacher KJ, Rucker DD. On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods 2002; 7:19-40.
11. Fedorov V, Mannino F, Zhang R. Consequences of dichotomization. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 8:50-61.
12. Victor N. Clinically relevant differences and shifted null hypotheses. Methods of Information in Medicine 1987; 26:109-116.
13. Heidrich H, Cachovan M, Kreutzig A, Rieger H, Trampisch HJ. Guidelines for therapeutic studies in Fontaine's stages II-IV peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Vasa 1995; 24:114-119.
14. Johnson RA, Verrill S, Moore II DH. Two-sample rank tests for detecting changes that occur in a small proportion of the treated population. Biometrics 1986; 43:641-655.
15. Conover WJ, Salsburg D. Locally most powerful tests for detecting treatment effects when only a subset of patients can be expected to "respond" to treatment. Biometrics 1988; 44:189-196.
16. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products indicated for the treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD), 2006. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003490.pdf (accessed 23 May 2011).
17. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on the clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 2010. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2010/08/WC500095686.pdf (accessed 23 May 2011).
18. Kieser M, Röhmel J, Friede T. Power and sample size determination when assessing the clinical relevance of trial results by 'responder analyses'. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:3287-3305.
19. Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, 2011.
20. Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. British Journal of Medicine 1995; 310:452-454.
21. Acion L, Peterson JJ, Temple S, Arndt S. Probabilistic index: an intuitive non-parametric approach to measuring the size of treatment effects. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:591-602.
22. Brunner E, Munzel U. Nichtparametrische Datenanalyse. Springer: Berlin, 2002.
23. Schacht A, Bogaerts K, Bluhmki E, Lesaffre E. A new nonparametric approach for baseline covariate adjustment for two-group comparative studies. Biometrics 2008; 64:1110-1116.
24. Koziol J, Jia Z. The concordance index C and the Mann-Whitney parameter Pr(X> Y ) with randomly censored data. Biometrical Journal 2009; 51:467-474.
25. Newcombe RG. Confidence intervals for an effect size measure based on the Mann-Whitney statistic. Part 2: asymptotic methods and evaluation. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:559-573.
26. Bordley RF. The Hippocratic oath, effect size, and utility theory. Medical Decision Making 2009; 29:377-379.
27. Saver JL. Number needed to treat estimates incorporating effects over the entire range of clinical outcomes. Archives of Neurology 2004; 61:1066-1070.
28. Newcombe RG. Confidence intervals for an effect size measure based on the Mann-Whitney statistic. Part 1: general issues and tail-area-based methods. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:543-557.
29. Miller RG. Survival Analysis. Wiley: New York, 1981.
30. Buyse M. Reformulating the hazard ratio to enhance communication with clinical investigators. Clinical Trials 2008; 5:641-642.
31. Koziol JA, Feng AC. On the analysis and interpretation of outcome measures in stroke clinical trials: lessons from the SAINT I study of NXY-059 for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2006; 37:2644-2647.
32. Browne RH. The t-test p value and its relationship to the effect size and P(X>Y). The American Statistician 2010; 64:30-33.
33. Noether GE. Sample size determination for some common nonparametric tests. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1987; 82:645-647.
34. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of multiple sclerosis, 2010. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003485.pdf (accessed 23 May 2011).
35. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33:1444-1452.
36. Giovannoni G, Comi G, Cook S, Rammohan K, Rieckmann P, Soelberg Sørensen P, Vermersch P, Chang P, Hamlett A, Musch B, Greenberg SJ, for the CLARITY Study Group. A placebo-controlled trial of oral cladribine for relapsing multiple sclerosis. New England Journal of Medicine 2010; 362:416-26.
37. Kappos L, Radue EW, O'Connor P, Polman C, Hohlfeld R, Calabresi P, Selmaj K, Agoropoulou C, Leyk M, Zhang-Auberson L, Burtin P, for the FREEDOMS Study Group. A placebo-controlled trial of oral fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis. New England Journal of Medicine 2010; 362:387-401.
38. Westfall PH. Improving power by dichotomizing. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2011; 3:353-362.
39. Held L. A nomogram for p values. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2010; 10:21.