Opportunities for more powerful statistical analyses of ordinal scales: A scoping review of neurological trials
Long, Y.; de Ruiter, S. C.; Luijten, L. W. G.; Wiegers, E. J. A.; Dippel, D. W. C.; van Doorn, P. A.; Jacobs, B. C.; Steyerberg, E. W.
Show abstract
Background and ObjectivesOrdinal scales are widely adopted as outcome measures in neurological randomized controlled trials (RCTs). There have been extensive discussions about appropriate statistical analysis strategies of ordinal neurological outcomes. We aimed to evaluate which statistical methods have been used to test and estimate treatment effects from ordinal outcomes in recent RCTs across a range of acute neurological diseases. MethodsWe searched for RCTs in five acute monophasic neurological diseases (stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI), subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), meningitis, and Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)) published in high-impact journals between January 1, 2015 and November 1, 2023. Trials had to report on an ordinal scale as the primary or secondary outcome. Two independent reviewers assessed whether/how investigators (1) delt with the ordinal nature of outcomes, (2) assessed and reported key assumptions,(3)utilized longitudinal measurements, (4) adjusted for prognostic variables. ResultsWe included 70 RCTs for treatment evaluations in stroke (n=36), TBI (n=13), SAH (n=10), meningitis (n=7), and GBS (n=4). In 46/70 (66%) trials, investigators retained the full ordering information, commonly analyzed by a proportional odds model (33/46 trials, 72%). The proportional odds assumption was not addressed in 23/33 (62%) of these trials. In 22/70 (31%) trials, the ordinal outcome was dichotomized, with notable disagreement on the cut-point within neurological diseases. In 41/70 (59%) trials, the ordinal outcome was assessed at multiple time points, while some form of longitudinal data analysis was performed in only three (7%) of these 41 studies. The time point chosen for analysis was inconsistent within neurological diseases. DiscussionThe current practice of analyzing ordinal outcomes is often suboptimal in neurological trials according to modern statistical standards. Dichotomization and focus on a single arbitrary time point are still common, while more efficient analysis strategies exist. Further research needs to clarify the balance between maximizing the statistical power and assumptions made in approaches that better leverage ordinal information.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Behavioral Effects in Disorders of Consciousness Following Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials 91%
- Sensorimotor upper limb therapy does not improve somatosensory function and may negatively interfere with motor recovery: a randomized controlled trial in the early rehabilitation phase after stroke 91%
- Preliminary outcomes of combined treadmill and overground high-intensity interval training in ambulatory chronic stroke 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- The neuroprotective effects of estrogen and estrogenic compounds in spinal cord injury 89%
- Is an earlier onset of focal epilepsy associated with atypical language lateralization? A systematic review, meta-analysis and new data 88%
- The central autonomic system revisited - convergent evidence for a regulatory role of the insular and midcingulate cortex from neuroimaging meta-analyses 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Multicenter preclinical studies as an innovative method to enhance translation: a systematic review of published studies 94%
- Preclinical systematic review of CCR5 antagonists as cerebroprotective and stroke recovery enhancing agents 93%
- The Proportion of Randomized Controlled Trials That Inform Clinical Practice: A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Efficacy and safety of tirofiban following intravenous thrombolysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 94%
- Efficacy and safety of erythropoietin for traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 89%
- L-arginine and aged garlic extract for the prevention of migraine: a study protocol for a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase-II trial (LARGE trial) 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Tenecteplase and Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Pairwise and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials 94%
- The effect of galvanic vestibular stimulation on postural balance in Parkinson’s Disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis 91%
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Future Promises, Perils, and Practicalities 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.