4.2 Article

A Data-Generation Process for Data with Specified Risk Differences or Numbers Needed to Treat

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03610910903528301

关键词

Absolute risk reduction; Average treatment effect; Average treatment effect for the treated; Data-generating process; Marginal treatment effect; Monte Carlo simulations; Number needed to treat; Risk difference; Simulations

资金

  1. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES)
  2. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (MOHLTC)
  3. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [MOP 86508]
  4. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Monte Carlo simulation methods are increasingly being used to evaluate the performance of statistical methods and estimators. However, the utility of these methods depends upon the existence of appropriate data-generating processes. Clinical commentators have suggested that the risk difference and the associated number needed to treat (NNT) are important measures of treatment effect when outcomes are binary. While these quantities are easily estimated in randomized controlled trials, there is an increasing interest in methods to estimate these quantities using observational or non-randomized data. However, the lack of a data-generating process for simulating data in which treatment induces a specified risk difference hinders the systematic examination of the performance of these methods. In the current study, we describe and evaluate the performance of a data-generating process for simulating data in which treatment induces a specified risk difference. The process is based upon an iterative process of evaluating marginal risk differences using Monte Carlo integration. The proposed data-generating process is flexible and can easily incorporate different distributions for baseline covariates and different levels of the baseline risk of the event. The data-generating process can also be easily modified to simulate data in which treatment induces a specified relative risk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据