Comparison of three longitudinal analysis models for the health-related quality of life in oncology: a simulation study

Anota, Amélie; Barbieri, Antoine; Savina, Marion; Pam, Alhousseiny; Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie; Bonnetain, Franck; Bascoul-Mollevi, Caroline

doi:10.1186/s12955-014-0192-2

Table 4 Power of the test of interaction between treatment arm and time, for simulations with complete data

From: Comparison of three longitudinal analysis models for the health-related quality of life in oncology: a simulation study

N	I	J	ρ	5 measurement times						10 measurement times
				SM	TTD baseline	TTD best	TUDD baseline	TUDD best	LPCM	SM	TTD baseline	TTD best	TUDD baseline	TUDD best	LPCM
100	1	4	0.4	0.518	0.118	0.102	0.130	0.100	0.472	0.784	0.134	0.132	0.120	0.058	0.654
			0.7	0.418	0.148	0.104	0.156	0.126	0.388	0.578	0.114	0.110	0.118	0.082	0.484
			0.9	0.404	0.148	0.124	0.174	0.142	0.380	0.414	0.124	0.126	0.130	0.084	0.352
	2	4	0.4	0.590	0.182	0.146	0.218	0.138	0.528	0.874	0.172	0.158	0.192	0.080	0.726
			0.7	0.488	0.214	0.162	0.208	0.162	0.432	0.628	0.188	0.180	0.192	0.096	0.354
			0.9	0.414	0.226	0.150	0.216	0.134	0.394	0.466	0.206	0.164	0.210	0.096	0.290
	4	4	0.4	0.680	0.260	0.168	0.204	0.128	0.412	0.916	0.236	0.190	0.246	0.090	0.396
			0.7	0.550	0.290	0.214	0.246	0.148	0.394	0.664	0.282	0.228	0.258	0.116	0.214
			0.9	0.496	0.394	0.290	0.364	0.210	0.428	0.428	0.400	0.284	0.314	0.150	0.228
200	1	4	0.4	0.812	0.212	0.162	0.240	0.142	0.778	0.970	0.140	0.168	0.182	0.060	0.858
			0.7	0.644	0.208	0.168	0.204	0.148	0.622	0.872	0.170	0.184	0.216	0.066	0.798
			0.9	0.644	0.234	0.176	0.256	0.160	0.612	0.670	0.194	0.152	0.204	0.082	0.572
	2	4	0.4	0.894	0.296	0.232	0.304	0.148	0.830	0.992	0.272	0.246	0.328	0.116	0.952
			0.7	0.760	0.350	0.262	0.344	0.214	0.678	0.934	0.326	0.242	0.334	0.114	0.618
			0.9	0.720	0.416	0.324	0.440	0.276	0.710	0.726	0.398	0.316	0.400	0.156	0.494
		7	0.4	0.936	0.346	0.270	0.328	0.214	0.832	0.999	0.362	0.324	0.366	0.096	0.900
			0.7	0.826	0.468	0.392	0.458	0.284	0.678	0.926	0.444	0.358	0.360	0.124	0.458
			0.9	0.810	0.580	0.442	0.614	0.400	0.788	0.726	0.600	0.506	0.536	0.218	0.458
	4	4	0.4	0.954	0.402	0.292	0.364	0.156	0.722	0.996	0.370	0.288	0.366	0.118	0.672
			0.7	0.812	0.552	0.394	0.456	0.236	0.606	0.934	0.484	0.362	0.380	0.142	0.368
			0.9	0.796	0.678	0.518	0.632	0.388	0.760	0.728	0.608	0.510	0.494	0.196	0.374
300	1	4	0.4	0.928	0.218	0.180	0.274	0.160	0.916	0.998	0.202	0.236	0.234	0.062	0.920
			0.7	0.842	0.274	0.234	0.282	0.162	0.842	0.974	0.232	0.220	0.242	0.082	0.920
			0.9	0.820	0.338	0.248	0.386	0.234	0.796	0.856	0.244	0.236	0.300	0.108	0.772
	2	4	0.4	0.980	0.410	0.336	0.446	0.232	0.948	0.998	0.390	0.342	0.424	0.092	0.988
			0.7	0.918	0.494	0.366	0.514	0.304	0.858	0.984	0.500	0.378	0.462	0.124	0.788
			0.9	0.902	0.560	0.418	0.594	0.366	0.886	0.902	0.508	0.388	0.476	0.154	0.670
	4	4	0.4	0.990	0.578	0.416	0.510	0.242	0.856	0.998	0.560	0.398	0.486	0.172	0.822
			0.7	0.956	0.636	0.488	0.564	0.302	0.792	0.990	0.678	0.526	0.582	0.194	0.516
			0.9	0.966	0.820	0.678	0.790	0.484	0.916	0.912	0.834	0.650	0.708	0.300	0.530

The methods compared are the Score and Mixed Model (SM), Longitudinal Partial Credit Model (LPCM), Time to HRQoL score deterioration as compared to the baseline score (TTD baseline) or the best previous score (TTD best) and time until definitive deterioration of the HRQoL score as compared to the baseline score (TUDD baseline) or the best previous score (TUDD best) for different values of sample size (N), items (I), response category per item (J) and correlations between HRQoL measures (ρ).

Back to article page

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us

Submission enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Contact us