Estimating sample means and standard deviations from the log-normal distribution using medians and quartiles: evaluating reporting requirements for primary and secondary endpoints of meta-analyses in anesthesiology.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pei-Fu Chen, Franklin Dexter
{"title":"Estimating sample means and standard deviations from the log-normal distribution using medians and quartiles: evaluating reporting requirements for primary and secondary endpoints of meta-analyses in anesthesiology.","authors":"Pei-Fu Chen, Franklin Dexter","doi":"10.1007/s12630-025-02922-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Clinical trials often report medians and quartiles due to skewed data distributions. We sought to evaluate the methods currently used in meta-analyses in anesthesiology to estimate means and standard deviations (SDs) from medians and quartiles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We simulated sample sizes (n = 15, 27, 51) and coefficients of variation (CV = 0.15, 0.3, 0.5), representative scenarios in anesthesiology studies, generating data that have a log-normal distribution with zero log-scale means. We calculated generalized confidence intervals for the ratios of means and ratios of SDs using means and SDs estimated from three quartiles in time scale, using Luo et al.'s and Wan et al.'s methods, McGrath et al.'s quantile estimation and Box-Cox transformation, and Cai et al.'s maximum likelihood estimation method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The method by Luo et al. and Wan et al. produced 95% confidence intervals for the ratio of means with coverage ranging from 92.4% to 93.6%, and for SDs from 79.2 to 89.6. McGrath et al.'s quantile estimation method yielded coverage for mean ratios between 88.5% and 91.5% and SDs between 78.0 and 82.7. McGrath et al.'s Box-Cox transformation method showed coverage for mean ratios from 86.6% to 94.4% and SDs from 67.1 to 83.1. The maximum likelihood estimation method by Cai et al. for nonnormal distributions showed coverage for mean ratios from 78.9% to 86.4% and SDs from 67.6 to 78.0.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All evaluated methods of estimating means and standard deviations from quartiles of log-normal distributed data result in confidence interval coverages below the expected 95%. Because these methods are widely used in meta-analyses of anesthesiology data, P values reported as < 0.05 cannot be trusted. Anesthesiology journals and investigators should revise reporting requirements for continuous skewed variables. We advise reporting the quartiles, mean, and SD, or the quartiles and including the raw data for the relevant variables as supplemental content. This holistic approach could improve the reliability of statistical inferences in meta-analyses of anesthesiology research, particularly when skewed distributions are involved.</p>","PeriodicalId":56145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","volume":"72 4","pages":"633-643"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-025-02922-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Clinical trials often report medians and quartiles due to skewed data distributions. We sought to evaluate the methods currently used in meta-analyses in anesthesiology to estimate means and standard deviations (SDs) from medians and quartiles.

Methods: We simulated sample sizes (n = 15, 27, 51) and coefficients of variation (CV = 0.15, 0.3, 0.5), representative scenarios in anesthesiology studies, generating data that have a log-normal distribution with zero log-scale means. We calculated generalized confidence intervals for the ratios of means and ratios of SDs using means and SDs estimated from three quartiles in time scale, using Luo et al.'s and Wan et al.'s methods, McGrath et al.'s quantile estimation and Box-Cox transformation, and Cai et al.'s maximum likelihood estimation method.

Results: The method by Luo et al. and Wan et al. produced 95% confidence intervals for the ratio of means with coverage ranging from 92.4% to 93.6%, and for SDs from 79.2 to 89.6. McGrath et al.'s quantile estimation method yielded coverage for mean ratios between 88.5% and 91.5% and SDs between 78.0 and 82.7. McGrath et al.'s Box-Cox transformation method showed coverage for mean ratios from 86.6% to 94.4% and SDs from 67.1 to 83.1. The maximum likelihood estimation method by Cai et al. for nonnormal distributions showed coverage for mean ratios from 78.9% to 86.4% and SDs from 67.6 to 78.0.

Conclusions: All evaluated methods of estimating means and standard deviations from quartiles of log-normal distributed data result in confidence interval coverages below the expected 95%. Because these methods are widely used in meta-analyses of anesthesiology data, P values reported as < 0.05 cannot be trusted. Anesthesiology journals and investigators should revise reporting requirements for continuous skewed variables. We advise reporting the quartiles, mean, and SD, or the quartiles and including the raw data for the relevant variables as supplemental content. This holistic approach could improve the reliability of statistical inferences in meta-analyses of anesthesiology research, particularly when skewed distributions are involved.

使用中位数和四分位数估计对数正态分布的样本均值和标准差:评估麻醉学荟萃分析的主要和次要终点的报告要求。
目的:由于数据分布偏倚,临床试验经常报告中位数和四分位数。我们试图评估目前麻醉学荟萃分析中用于估计中位数和四分位数的平均值和标准差(sd)的方法。方法:我们模拟了麻醉学研究中具有代表性的样本量(n = 15、27、51)和变异系数(CV = 0.15、0.3、0.5),生成的数据具有对数正态分布,对数尺度均值为零。我们使用Luo等人、Wan等人的方法、McGrath等人的分位数估计和Box-Cox变换,以及Cai等人的极大似然估计方法,利用三个四分位数在时间尺度上估计的均值和标准差,计算均值和标准差比值的广义置信区间。结果:Luo et al.和Wan et al.的方法产生了95%的置信区间,平均覆盖率为92.4% ~ 93.6%,SDs为79.2 ~ 89.6。McGrath等人的分位数估计方法的平均覆盖率在88.5%至91.5%之间,SDs在78.0至82.7之间。McGrath等人的Box-Cox变换方法显示,平均比率的覆盖率从86.6%到94.4%,SDs从67.1到83.1。Cai等人对非正态分布的最大似然估计方法显示,平均比率的覆盖率为78.9%至86.4%,SDs为67.6至78.0。结论:对数正态分布数据四分位数均值和标准差的所有评估方法的置信区间覆盖率均低于预期的95%。由于这些方法被广泛应用于麻醉学数据的荟萃分析,P值报道为
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (the Journal) is owned by the Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society and is published by Springer Science + Business Media, LLM (New York). From the first year of publication in 1954, the international exposure of the Journal has broadened considerably, with articles now received from over 50 countries. The Journal is published monthly, and has an impact Factor (mean journal citation frequency) of 2.127 (in 2012). Article types consist of invited editorials, reports of original investigations (clinical and basic sciences articles), case reports/case series, review articles, systematic reviews, accredited continuing professional development (CPD) modules, and Letters to the Editor. The editorial content, according to the mission statement, spans the fields of anesthesia, acute and chronic pain, perioperative medicine and critical care. In addition, the Journal publishes practice guidelines and standards articles relevant to clinicians. Articles are published either in English or in French, according to the language of submission.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信