Table 3.
Study planning scenarios considered for the comparative feasibility analysis. We examined six combinations of pr(xe,i |xo,i; ω) ≡ pr(gi = 1|racei, cityi; ω) and β(e) ≡ (βg, βgt) in order to assess the impact that these values have on parameter uncertainty estimates. In CF-1, CF-2, CF-5, and CF-6, we assumed a fixed prevalence for gi ≡ Ii(TT). In CF-1 and CF-2 it was fixed at 0.2, and in CF-5 and CF-6 it was fixed at 0.3. In CF-3 and CF-4, it was allowed to vary as a function of gender and city. We calculated pr(gi = 1|age at baselinei, cityi; ω) by using the fitted values from the logistic regression model on all 476 participants shown in table 4. This was intended to capture the “true” value of pr(gi = 1|xo,i; ω). We consider two values for (βg, βgt); (0, 0) in CF-1, CF-2, and CF-3, and (0.35, −0.37) in CF-4, CF-5, and CF-6. The former value assumes the null hypothesis of no main effect or time interaction for the IL10 SNP. The latter value is approximately equal to the value observed in the original, full cohort analysis.
| (βg, βgt) | pr(gi = 1 |xo,i; ω) | |
|---|---|---|
| CF-1 | (0, 0) | 0.2 |
| CF-2 | (0, 0) | f(race, city) |
| CF-3 | (0, 0) | 0.3 |
| CF-4 | (0.35, −0.37) | 0.2 |
| CF-5 | (0.35, −0.37) | f(race, city) |
| CF-6 | (0.35, −0.37) | 0.3 |