Exploring interaction effects in small samples increases rates of false-positive and false-negative findings: Results from a systematic review and simulation study

Files

Access status: Embargo until 2050-01-01 , 1_s2.0_S0895435614000596_main.pdf (1.1 MB)

Publication date

2014-07-01

Authors

Schmidt, Amand F.
Groenwold, Rolf H HISNI 0000000394374611
Knol, Maarten JISNI 0000000394388693
Hoes, Arno W.
Nielen, M.ISNI 000000039091633X
Roes, Kit C.B.
de Boer, AnthoniusISNI 0000000389596105
Klungel, Olaf H.ISNI 0000000390199414

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

License

Abstract

Objective To give a comprehensive comparison of the performance of commonly applied interaction tests. Methods A literature review and simulation study was performed evaluating interaction tests on the odds ratio (OR) or the risk difference (RD) scales: Cochran Q (Q), Breslow-Day (BD), Tarone, unconditional score, likelihood ratio (LR), Wald, and relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI)-based tests. Results Review results agreed with results from our simulation study, which showed that on the OR scale, in small sample sizes (eg, number of subjects ≤ 250) the type 1 error rates of the LR test was 0.10; the BD and Tarone tests showed results around 0.05. On the RD scale, the LR and RERI tests had error rates around 0.05. On both scales, tests did not differ regarding power. When exposure prevented the outcome RERI-based tests were relatively underpowered (eg, N = 100; RERI power = 5% vs. Wald power = 18%). With increasing sample size, difference decreased. Conclusion In small samples, interaction tests differed. On the OR scale, the Tarone and BD tests are recommended. On the RD scale, the LR and RERI-based tests performed best. However, RERI-based tests are underpowered compared with other tests, when exposure prevents the outcome, and sample size is limited.

Keywords

Effect modification, Epidemiologic methods, Interaction, Odds ratio, Relative excess risk due to interaction, Review, Risk ratio, Simulation, Statistics, Subgroups, article, comparative study, false negative result, false positive result, laboratory test, outcome assessment, priority journal, rating scale, sample size, scoring system, simulation, systematic review (topic)

Citation

Schmidt, A F, Groenwold, R H H, Knol, M J, Hoes, A W, Nielen, M, Roes, K C B, De Boer, A & Klungel, O H 2014, 'Exploring interaction effects in small samples increases rates of false-positive and false-negative findings: Results from a systematic review and simulation study', Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 821-829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.02.008