» Articles » PMID: 31460677

Overdispersion Models for Correlated Multinomial Data: Applications to Blinding Assessment

Overview
Journal Stat Med
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Public Health
Date 2019 Aug 29
PMID 31460677
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Overdispersion models have been extensively studied for correlated normal and binomial data but much less so for correlated multinomial data. In this work, we describe a multinomial overdispersion model that leads to the specification of the first two moments of the outcome and allows the estimation of the global parameters using generalized estimating equations (GEE). We introduce a Global Blinding Index as a target parameter and illustrate the application of the GEE method to its estimation from (1) a clinical trial with clustering by practitioner and (2) a meta-analysis on psychiatric disorders. We examine the impact of a small number of clusters, high variability in cluster sizes, and the magnitude of the intraclass correlation on the performance of the GEE estimators of the Global Blinding Index using the data simulated from different models. We compare these estimators with the inverse-variance weighted estimators and a maximum-likelihood estimator, derived under the Dirichlet-multinomial model. Our results indicate that the performance of the GEE estimators was satisfactory even in situations with a small number of clusters, whereas the inverse-variance weighted estimators performed poorly, especially for larger values of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Our findings and illustrations may be instrumental for practitioners who analyze clustered multinomial data from clinical trials and/or meta-analysis.

Citing Articles

Blinding Assessment: One Step Forward.

Kim J, Park J, Bang H, Kolahi J Dent Hypotheses. 2022; 12(4):169-173.

PMID: 35028192 PMC: 8754420. DOI: 10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_99_21.


Blinding, sham, and treatment effects in randomized controlled trials for back pain in 2000-2019: A review and meta-analytic approach.

Freed B, Williams B, Situ X, Landsman V, Kim J, Moroz A Clin Trials. 2021; 18(3):361-370.

PMID: 33478258 PMC: 8172416. DOI: 10.1177/1740774520984870.

References
1.
Zeger S, Liang K . Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 1986; 42(1):121-30. View

2.
DerSimonian R, Laird N . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(3):177-88. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2. View

3.
Bang H, Ni L, Davis C . Assessment of blinding in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 2004; 25(2):143-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2003.10.016. View

4.
Krewski D, Zhu Y . Applications of multinomial dose-response models in developmental toxicity risk assessment. Risk Anal. 1994; 14(4):613-27. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00275.x. View

5.
Viechtbauer W . Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2007; 60(Pt 1):29-60. DOI: 10.1348/000711005X64042. View