An Empirical Comparison of Several Clustered Data Approaches Under Confounding Due to Cluster Effects in the Analysis of Complications of Coronary Angioplasty

In the analysis of binary response data from many types of large studies, the data are likely to have arisen from multiple centers, resulting in a within-center correlation for the response. Such correlation, or clustering, occurs when outcomes within centers tend to be more similar to each other than to outcomes in other centers. In studies where there is also variability among centers with respect to the exposure of interest, analysis of the exposure-outcome association may be confounded, even after accounting for within-center correlations. We apply several analytic methods to compare the risk of major complications associated with two strategies, staged and combined procedures, for performing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), a mechanical means of relieving blockage of blood vessels due to atherosclerosis. Combined procedures are used in some centers as a cost-cutting strategy. We performed a number of population-averaged and cluster-specific (conditional) analyses, which (a) make no adjustments for center effects of any kind; (b) make adjustments for the effect of center on only the response; or (c) make adjustments for both the effect of center on the response and the relationship between center and exposure. The method used for this third approach decomposes the procedure type variable into within-center and among-center components, resulting in two odds ratio estimates. The naive analysis, ignoring clusters, gave a highly significant effect of procedure type (OR = 1.6). Population average models gave marginally to very nonsignificant estimates of the OR for treatment type ranging from 1.6 to 1.2 with adjustment only for the effect of centers on response. These results depended on the assumed correlation structure. Conditional (cluster-specific) models and other methods that decomposed the treatment type variable into among- and within-center components all found no within-center effect of procedure type (OR = 1.02, consistently) and a considerable among-center effect. This among-center variability in outcomes was related to the proportion of patients who receive combined procedures and was found even when conditioned on procedure type (within-center) and other patient- and center-level covariates. This example illustrates the importance of addressing the potential for center effects to confound an outcome-exposure association when average exposure varies across clusters. While conditional approaches provide estimates of the within-cluster effect, they do not provide information about among-center effects. We recommend using the decomposition approach, as it provides both types of estimates.

[1]  F. Loop,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). , 1988, Circulation.

[2]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  Between- and within-cluster covariate effects in the analysis of clustered data. , 1998, Biometrics.

[3]  R J Krone,et al.  Risk of major complications from coronary angioplasty performed immediately after diagnostic coronary angiography: results from the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  N. Breslow,et al.  Bias correction in generalised linear mixed models with a single component of dispersion , 1995 .

[5]  Susan Weaver,et al.  LETTER TO THE EDITOR: ASSOCIATION MODELS FOR PERIODONTAL DISEASE PROGRESSION: A COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR CLUSTERED BINARY DATA by T. R. Ten Have, J. R. Landis and S. Weaver, Statistics in Medicine14, 413–430 (1995) , 1996 .

[6]  T. Ryan.  Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  P. Albert,et al.  Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[8]  Effect of Confounding and Other Misspecification in Models for Longitudinal Data , 1997 .

[9]  N. Breslow,et al.  Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models , 1993 .

[10]  J R Landis,et al.  Association models for periodontal disease progression: a comparison of methods for clustered binary data. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  K Y Liang,et al.  Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. , 1986, Biometrics.

[12]  J. O’Keefe,et al.  Safety and cost effectiveness of combined coronary angiography and angioplasty. , 1991, American heart journal.

[13]  K. Bailey,et al.  Safety and efficacy of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty performed at time of diagnostic catheterization compared with that performed at other times. , 1989, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  M Palta,et al.  Effect of omitted confounders on the analysis of correlated binary data. , 1997, Biometrics.

[15]  N. Breslow,et al.  Statistical methods in cancer research: volume 1- The analysis of case-control studies , 1980 .

[16]  E. Vonesh,et al.  Linear and Nonlinear Models for the Analysis of Repeated Measurements , 1996 .

[17]  A Donner,et al.  Adjustments to the Mantel-Haenszel chi-square statistic and odds ratio variance estimator when the data are clustered. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  N. Breslow,et al.  Bias Correction in Generalized Linear Mixed Models with Multiple Components of Dispersion , 1996 .

[19]  Thomas J. Ryan,et al.  Guidelines for Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Committee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty) , 1993, Circulation.

[20]  R. Wolfinger,et al.  Generalized linear mixed models a pseudo-likelihood approach , 1993 .

[21]  M. Lesperance,et al.  Estimation efficiency in a binary mixed-effects model setting , 1996 .

[22]  N. Schork,et al.  Analysis of Coronary Angioplasty Practice in the United States With an Insurance‐Claims Data Base , 1993, Circulation.

[23]  R. Wolfinger.  Covariance structure selection in general mixed models , 1993 .