Upload
shelby-pearson
View
65
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
PH 241: Chapter 16 Nicholas P. Jewell University of California Berkeley April 17-26, 2006. Frequency Matching. Situation: Stratification factors have few distinct levels - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1
PH 241: Chapter 16
Nicholas P. JewellUniversity of California Berkeley
April 17-26, 2006
2
Frequency Matching
Situation: Stratification factors have few distinct levels
Goal: To maintain balance on the marginals of planned strata so that precision is not lost when stratification is used to reduce confounding
Implementation: Perform mini studies at each stratification level
3
Pancreatic Cancer and Coffee Drinking, Stratified by Sex
Pancreatic Cancer
Sex Cases Controls
Females Coffee drinking
(cups/day)
10
14011
28056
2.545
Males Coffee drinking
(cups/day)
10
2079
27532
2.676
RO ˆ
Original balance: 1.75 controls for every case
Balance: 2.2:1
Balance: 1.4:1
Frequency matching: select 265 female and 378 male controls so thatbalance is approximately 1.75:1 in both strata
4
Frequency Matching: Analysis
For example, in case-control studies, we can no longer estimate P(E |D) etc, only
P(E |D,C ) where C is the matching factor Are therefore committed to stratification on
CCan no longer evaluate the association
between C and D in case-control studiesCan still use logistic regression so long
as C is always appropriately entered into the model
5
Pair Matching
Matching factors have a very high number of discrete levels
Pair Matching One case, one control at any given common
level of matching factors (Case-Control) One exposed, one unexposed at any given
common level of matching factors (Cohort)
6
Types of Matched Pair Case-Control Data
(1) Control
E not E
Case
EX
not E
(2) Control
E not E
Case
EX
not E
(3) Control
E not E
Case
E
not EX
(4) Control
E not E
Case
E
not EX
7
Summarization of Matched Pair Case-Control Data
Control
E not E
CaseE A B
not E C D
N
Classification of Pairs, not individuals
8
Matched Pair Case-Control Data on Spontaneous Abortions and
CHDControl
SA No SA
Case SA 7 18
No SA 5 20
50
1
1
Matched on age and location of residence
9
Exposure Patterns in the Four Types of Matched Pair Case-Control Data
(1) D not D
E1 1 2
not E0 0 0
1 1
(2) D not D
E1 0 1
not E0 1 1
1 1
(3) D not D D
E0 1 1
not E1 0 1
1 1
(4) D not D D
E0 0 0
not E1 1 2
1 1
10
Odds Ratio with Matched Pair Case-Control Data
Pr(pair has exposed case | discordant)
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
iiii
ii
i
OR
OR
s
s
r
r
s
s
r
r
rssr
sr
P
1
1)1(
)1(
)1(
)1(
)1()1(
)1(
),|(
),|(
ii
ii
CDEPs
CDEPr
11
Odds Ratio with Matched Pair Case-Control Data
If no interaction: Pr(pair has exposed case | discordant)
For example OR = 1 & P = 0.5
Estimation: Known as conditional maximum likelihood
Testing:
OR
ORP
1
CBROCBBP /ˆ ˆ
2)1(
22
0
)(or
)1,0( :statistic 5.01:
CB
B-C
NCB
B-CzPORH
McN
12
Matched Pair Case-Control Data on Spontaneous Abortions and
CHDControl
SA No SA
Case SA 7 18
No SA 5 20
50
1
1
6.3518ˆ 783.023
18ˆ ROP
Confidence intervals:
)40.12,29.1(:
)925.0,563.0(:
OR
P
007.0 35.7518
)518( 22
pMcN
13
Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Procedures for Pair-Matched
DataPair Type
# Pairs of Type
ai Ai Vi aidi/ni bici/ni
(1) A 1 1 0 0 0
(2) B 1 ½ ¼ ½ 0
(3) C 0 ½ ¼ 0 ½
(4) D 0 ½ 0 0 0
Totals A+B A+(B+C)/2
(B+C)/4 B/2 C/2
CB
CBCB
CBABA
2
2
)(
4
2)(
C
B
C
B
2/
2/
Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test statistic:
Mantel-Haenszel Estimator:
Small-sample OR estimator:1
ˆ
C
BRO SS
14
1:M Matching
Can use conditional maximum likelihood or Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel procedures (no longer exactly the same)
15
Further Assessment of Confounding and Interaction
Further confounders (non matching factors) Stratify further on new confounders Quick loss of precision
Interaction Straightforward if interested in interaction of
E with a matching factor If the additional covariate is a non-matching
factor, further stratification limits power to estimate interactive effects
16
Logistic Regression Model for Matched Data
bxa
bxIaIaa
ixXDp
p
i
NN
ix
x
*
1111
th
factors) matching of level , | for oddslog(1
log
1,,1factors, matching theof levels theindexes NjNI j
• Too many unknown parameters for regular maximum likelihood•Use conditional maximum likelihood (conditioning on the exposure pattern in the matched pair)
Use conditional likelihood (which only depends on b) just as a conventional likelihood (ML estimates, SEs, Wald test, LR tests)
17
Coding for Matched Study of Pregnancy History and CHD
)0( abortions sspontaneou ofhistory no 0
)1( abortions sspontaneou ofhistory any 1
SA
SAX
33
22
11
00
SA
SA
SA
SA
X ord
otherwise0
31
otherwise0
21
otherwise0
11
3
21
SAX
SAX
SAX
abortions sspontaneou ofNumber SA
65pairin age average 0
65pairin age average 1Y
nonsmoker 0
smoker 1Z
18
Matched Study of Pregnancy History and CHD: Fitted Logistic Regression Models(#) Model Param
.Estimat
eSD OR p-value Max. log
lik.
(1) b 1.281
0.506
3.600 0.011 -30.76
(2) bc
1.609-0.629
0.775
1.029
5.0000.533
0.0380.541 -30.57
(3) bc
1.3380.279
0.521
0.501
3.8131.322
0.0100.577 -30.60
(4) bcd
1.039-0.0020.819
0.627
0.609
1.027
2.8250.9982.267
0.0970.9980.426 -30.27
(5) b1
b2
b3
1.2520.6482.173
0.654
0.734
1.099
3.4961.9128.786
0.0560.3770.048 -29.96
(6)b 0.589
0.251
1.802 0.019 -31.14
(7)b 0.473
0.215
1.605 0.028 -30.89
bxa
pp
i
)1/log(
)(
)1/log(
yxcbx
app i
)(
)1/log(
zxdczbx
app i
332211
)1/log(
xbxbxb
app i
)(
)1/log(
ord
i
xb
app
czbx
app i
)1/log(
)(
)1/log(
SAb
app i
19
Matched Study of Birth Order and RDS: Fitted Logistic Regression
Models
(#) Model Param.
Estimate
SD OR p-value Max. log lik.
(1) b 1.355
0.397
3.875 0.001 -19.79
(2) bc
0.3361.743
0.586
0.847
1.4005.714
0.570.04 -17.57
bxa
pp
i
)1/log(
)(
)1/log(
yxcbx
app i
Matched Cohort study of RDS in twins221 twins: matched on everything common to twins!Birth order is known risk factor—can it be explained by other factors?
First Born
RDSNo
RDS
Second Born
RDS 24 31
No RDS 8 158
221
X is birth order (1 is second born); Y is delivery mode (1 is vaginal)
OR = 31/8 = 3.9
McNemar’s test statistic = 13.6, P = 0.0002
Caution:natural matched pairs