TABLE 2:
Comparison of Alternative Analytic Methods for the Analysis of Audiometric Data: Simulation Study Scenario 2 a
| Both-ear methodb | Worse-ear methodc | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relative biasd (%) | Empirical standard deviatione | Estimated standard errorf | Converge rateg (%) | Relative bias (%) | Empirical standard Deviation | Estimated standard error | Converge rate (%) | |
| x1,1 | −3.51 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.95 | −13.90 | 0.25 | 0.27 | 0.94 |
| x1,2 | 2.51 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.95 | −1.63 | 0.27 | 0.29 | 0.94 |
| x1,3 | 5.62 | 0.23 | 0.24 | 0.95 | −2.91 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.94 |
| x2 | 1.76 | 0.20 | 0.21 | 0.95 | 3.93 | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.93 |
| x3 | 0.90 | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.94 | 8.24 | 0.23 | 0.24 | 0.90 |
| x1,1×x2 | −2.04 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.94 | −11.04 | 0.32 | 0.33 | 0.94 |
| x1,2×x2 | 1.52 | 0.27 | 0.28 | 0.95 | 9.28 | 0.31 | 0.33 | 0.94 |
| x1,3×x2 | 38.73 | 0.28 | 0.29 | 0.94 | −1.09 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.95 |
| x1,1×x3 | 23.29 | 0.30 | 0.32 | 0.94 | −35.35 | 0.33 | 0.34 | 0.94 |
| x1,2×x3 | 2.85 | 0.29 | 0.31 | 0.94 | 25.40 | 0.34 | 0.37 | 0.93 |
| x1,3×x3 | −7.50 | 0.26 | 0.28 | 0.94 | 127.11 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.93 |
| x4 | −6.67 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.95 | −17.82 | 0.04 | 42.00 | 0.96 |
Simulation Study Scenario with a 4-level categorical exposure, a 20% event rate and a sample size of 1000, based on 1000 simulation replicates; using exchangeable working covariance-covariance matrix.
Both-ear method: logistic regression with hearing data of both ears at three frequency categories as correlated outcome.
Worse-ear method: logistic regression with hearing data of the worse ear at three frequency categories as the outcome.
Relative Bias is 100 × (the mean of the estimated log (OR) over simulation replicates – the true log (OR))/the true log (OR), where OR stands for odds ratio.
Empirical standard deviation (SD) is the empirical SD of the log(OR) estimates from simulation replicates.
Estimated standard error (SE) is the average of the sandwich SE over the simulation replications.
Coverage Rate is the 95% confidence interval coverage rate based on the sandwich SE.
x1,1, x1,2, and x1,3: indicators for a categorical exposure; x2: dummy variable for mid-frequency; x3: dummy variable for high-frequency; x4 continuous ear-level baseline measurement.
The better-ear and left/right-ear methods have low convergence rates and thus the results are unavailable.