Statistics in ophthalmic research: Two eyes, one eye or the mean?

C. Y. Cheng, J. H. Liu, S. C. Chiang, S. J. Chen, Wen-Ming Hsu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Ophthalmic data, while different among individuals, are usually similar between fellow eyes of the same individual. This study was designed to illustrate alternative approaches to account for the correlation between fellow eyes. This is important for making inferences using data from both eyes. Methods. With the use of a real data set from a population-based study, we described the distribution of intraocular pressure (IOP) by estimating the mean and standard deviation (SD) and evaluated the potential risk factors of higher IOP based on the regression method. The units of observation studied were of both eyes, right eye only, left eye only, the eyes with higher IOP and the mean value of both eyes. Furthermore, the generalized estimating equation (GEE) method was used to account for the correlation between fellow eyes in the regression analysis. Results and inferences from the different approaches were compared. Results. The analysis included all the eyes, providing the largest sample size and unbiased estimates of the mean and SDs. There were some discrepancies among different approaches in the regression analysis. The GEE method simultaneously evaluated the effects of both eyes, and increased precision and enhanced inferences. Conclusions. Inconsistent results among different ophthalmic studies result from variations in not only study design and courses but also statistical methods. Making the best use of appropriate statistical techniques, which account for between eye correlation, provides valid statistical inferences.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)885-892
Number of pages8
JournalChinese Medical Journal (Taipei)
Volume63
Issue number12
Publication statusPublished - Dec 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Research
Intraocular Pressure
Regression Analysis
Sample Size
Observation
Population

Keywords

  • Generalized estimating equation
  • Intraocular pressure
  • Linear modeling
  • Statistics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cheng, C. Y., Liu, J. H., Chiang, S. C., Chen, S. J., & Hsu, W-M. (2000). Statistics in ophthalmic research: Two eyes, one eye or the mean? Chinese Medical Journal (Taipei), 63(12), 885-892.

Statistics in ophthalmic research : Two eyes, one eye or the mean? / Cheng, C. Y.; Liu, J. H.; Chiang, S. C.; Chen, S. J.; Hsu, Wen-Ming.

In: Chinese Medical Journal (Taipei), Vol. 63, No. 12, 01.12.2000, p. 885-892.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cheng, CY, Liu, JH, Chiang, SC, Chen, SJ & Hsu, W-M 2000, 'Statistics in ophthalmic research: Two eyes, one eye or the mean?', Chinese Medical Journal (Taipei), vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 885-892.
Cheng, C. Y. ; Liu, J. H. ; Chiang, S. C. ; Chen, S. J. ; Hsu, Wen-Ming. / Statistics in ophthalmic research : Two eyes, one eye or the mean?. In: Chinese Medical Journal (Taipei). 2000 ; Vol. 63, No. 12. pp. 885-892.
@article{c7c083ac0f464e35bfceb6573a6e4167,
title = "Statistics in ophthalmic research: Two eyes, one eye or the mean?",
abstract = "Background. Ophthalmic data, while different among individuals, are usually similar between fellow eyes of the same individual. This study was designed to illustrate alternative approaches to account for the correlation between fellow eyes. This is important for making inferences using data from both eyes. Methods. With the use of a real data set from a population-based study, we described the distribution of intraocular pressure (IOP) by estimating the mean and standard deviation (SD) and evaluated the potential risk factors of higher IOP based on the regression method. The units of observation studied were of both eyes, right eye only, left eye only, the eyes with higher IOP and the mean value of both eyes. Furthermore, the generalized estimating equation (GEE) method was used to account for the correlation between fellow eyes in the regression analysis. Results and inferences from the different approaches were compared. Results. The analysis included all the eyes, providing the largest sample size and unbiased estimates of the mean and SDs. There were some discrepancies among different approaches in the regression analysis. The GEE method simultaneously evaluated the effects of both eyes, and increased precision and enhanced inferences. Conclusions. Inconsistent results among different ophthalmic studies result from variations in not only study design and courses but also statistical methods. Making the best use of appropriate statistical techniques, which account for between eye correlation, provides valid statistical inferences.",
keywords = "Generalized estimating equation, Intraocular pressure, Linear modeling, Statistics",
author = "Cheng, {C. Y.} and Liu, {J. H.} and Chiang, {S. C.} and Chen, {S. J.} and Wen-Ming Hsu",
year = "2000",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "63",
pages = "885--892",
journal = "Journal of the Chinese Medical Association",
issn = "1726-4901",
publisher = "Elsevier Taiwan LLC",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Statistics in ophthalmic research

T2 - Two eyes, one eye or the mean?

AU - Cheng, C. Y.

AU - Liu, J. H.

AU - Chiang, S. C.

AU - Chen, S. J.

AU - Hsu, Wen-Ming

PY - 2000/12/1

Y1 - 2000/12/1

N2 - Background. Ophthalmic data, while different among individuals, are usually similar between fellow eyes of the same individual. This study was designed to illustrate alternative approaches to account for the correlation between fellow eyes. This is important for making inferences using data from both eyes. Methods. With the use of a real data set from a population-based study, we described the distribution of intraocular pressure (IOP) by estimating the mean and standard deviation (SD) and evaluated the potential risk factors of higher IOP based on the regression method. The units of observation studied were of both eyes, right eye only, left eye only, the eyes with higher IOP and the mean value of both eyes. Furthermore, the generalized estimating equation (GEE) method was used to account for the correlation between fellow eyes in the regression analysis. Results and inferences from the different approaches were compared. Results. The analysis included all the eyes, providing the largest sample size and unbiased estimates of the mean and SDs. There were some discrepancies among different approaches in the regression analysis. The GEE method simultaneously evaluated the effects of both eyes, and increased precision and enhanced inferences. Conclusions. Inconsistent results among different ophthalmic studies result from variations in not only study design and courses but also statistical methods. Making the best use of appropriate statistical techniques, which account for between eye correlation, provides valid statistical inferences.

AB - Background. Ophthalmic data, while different among individuals, are usually similar between fellow eyes of the same individual. This study was designed to illustrate alternative approaches to account for the correlation between fellow eyes. This is important for making inferences using data from both eyes. Methods. With the use of a real data set from a population-based study, we described the distribution of intraocular pressure (IOP) by estimating the mean and standard deviation (SD) and evaluated the potential risk factors of higher IOP based on the regression method. The units of observation studied were of both eyes, right eye only, left eye only, the eyes with higher IOP and the mean value of both eyes. Furthermore, the generalized estimating equation (GEE) method was used to account for the correlation between fellow eyes in the regression analysis. Results and inferences from the different approaches were compared. Results. The analysis included all the eyes, providing the largest sample size and unbiased estimates of the mean and SDs. There were some discrepancies among different approaches in the regression analysis. The GEE method simultaneously evaluated the effects of both eyes, and increased precision and enhanced inferences. Conclusions. Inconsistent results among different ophthalmic studies result from variations in not only study design and courses but also statistical methods. Making the best use of appropriate statistical techniques, which account for between eye correlation, provides valid statistical inferences.

KW - Generalized estimating equation

KW - Intraocular pressure

KW - Linear modeling

KW - Statistics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034527479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034527479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 11195139

AN - SCOPUS:0034527479

VL - 63

SP - 885

EP - 892

JO - Journal of the Chinese Medical Association

JF - Journal of the Chinese Medical Association

SN - 1726-4901

IS - 12

ER -