Search

Some existing confidence interval methods and hypothesis testing methods in the analysis of a contingency table with incomplete observations in both margins entirely depend on an underlying assumption that the sampling distribution of the observed counts is a product of independent multinomial/binomial distributions for complete and incomplete counts. However, it can be shown that this independency assumption is incorrect and can result in unreliable conclusions because of the under-estimation of the uncertainty. Therefore, the first objective of this paper is to derive the valid joint sampling distribution of the observed counts in a contingency table with incomplete observations in both margins. The second objective is to provide a new framework for analyzing incomplete contingency tables based on the derived joint sampling distribution of the observed counts by developing a Fisher scoring algorithm to calculate maximum likelihood estimates of parameters of interest, the bootstrap confidence interval methods, and the bootstrap testing hypothesis methods. We compare the differences between the valid sampling distribution and the sampling distribution under the independency assumption. Simulation studies showed that average/expected confidence-interval widths of parameters based on the sampling distribution under the independency assumption are shorter than those based on the new sampling distribution, yielding unrealistic results. A real data set is analyzed to illustrate the application of the new sampling distribution for incomplete contingency tables and the analysis results again confirm the conclusions obtained from the simulation studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, numerous methods have been developed for data mining of large drug safety databases, such as Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Adverse Event Reporting System, where data matrices are formed by drugs such as columns and adverse events as rows. Often, a large number of cells in these data matrices have zero cell counts and some of them are "true zeros" indicating that the drug-adverse event pairs cannot occur, and these zero counts are distinguished from the other zero counts that are modeled zero counts and simply indicate that the drug-adverse event pairs have not occurred yet or have not been reported yet. In this paper, a zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test method is proposed to identify drug-adverse event pairs that have disproportionately high reporting rates, which are also called signals. The maximum likelihood estimates of the model parameters of zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test are obtained using the expectation and maximization algorithm. The zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test is also modified to handle the stratified analyses for binary and categorical covariates (e.g. gender and age) in the data. The proposed zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test method is shown to asymptotically control the type I error and false discovery rate, and its finite sample performance for signal detection is evaluated through a simulation study. The simulation results show that the zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test method performs similar to Poisson model based likelihood ratio test method when the estimated percentage of true zeros in the database is small. Both the zero-inflated Poisson model based likelihood ratio test and likelihood ratio test methods are applied to six selected drugs, from the 2006 to 2011 Adverse Event Reporting System database, with varying percentages of observed zero-count cells. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]