Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Sample Size Determination of Univariate and Bivariate Ordinal Outcomes by Nonparametric Wilcoxon Tests
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Sample Size Determination of Univariate and Bivariate Ordinal Outcomes by Nonparametric Wilcoxon Tests
Park, Hae-Gang; Song, Hae-Hiang;
  PDF(new window)
The power function in sample size determination has to be characterized by an appropriate statistical test for the hypothesis of interest. Nonparametric tests are suitable in the analysis of ordinal data or frequency data with ordered categories which appear frequently in the biomedical research literature. In this paper, we study sample size calculation methods for the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for one- and two-dimensional ordinal outcomes. While the sample size formula for the univariate outcome which is based on the variances of the test statistic under both null and alternative hypothesis perform well, this formula requires additional information on probability estimates that appear in the variance of the test statistic under alternative hypothesis, and the values of these probabilities are generally unknown. We study the advantages and disadvantages of different sample size formulas with simulations. Sample sizes are calculated for the two-dimensional ordinal outcomes of efficacy and safety, for which bivariate Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test is appropriate than the multivariate parametric test.
Sample sizes;ordinal outcomes;univariate and bivariate WMW;
 Cited by
이현학, 송혜향 (2009). 이변량 효능과 안전성 이항변수의 표본수 결정방법, <응용통계 연구>, 22, 341–353

Agresti, A. (1984). Analysis of Ordinal Categorical Data, John Wiley& Sons, New York

Delong, E. R., Delong, D. M. and Clarke-Pearson, D. L. (1988). Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach, Biometrics, 44, 837–845

Graubard, B. I. and Korn, E. L. (1987). Choice of column scores for testing independence in ordered 2 $\times$ K contingency tables, Biometrics, 43, 471–476

Haldane, J. B. S. and Smith, C. A. B. (1948). A simple exact test for birth-order effect, Annals Eugen, 14, 117–124

Mann, H. B. and Whitney, D. R. (1947). On a test whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 50–60 crossref(new window)

Nabulsi, N. N., Tamim, H., Mahfoud, Z., Itani, M., Sabra, R., Chamseddine, F. and Mikati, M. (2006). Alternating ibuprofen and acetaminophen in the treatment of febrile children: A pilot study, BMC Medicine, 4, 4 crossref(new window)

Noether, G. E. (1987). Sample size determination for some common nonparametric tests, Journal of American Statistical Association, 82, 645–647 crossref(new window)

Sundrum, R. M. (1953). The power of Wilcoxon's 2-sample test, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 15, 246–252

Thall, P. F. and Cheng, S. (1999). Treatment comparisons based on two dimensional safety and efficacy alternatives in oncology trials, Biometrics, 55, 746–753 crossref(new window)

Van Dantzig, D. (1951). On the consistency and the power of Wilcoxon's two sample test, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie Van Wetenschappen, Proceedings Serise A, 54, 1–9

Vollandt, R. and Horn, M. (1997). Evaluation of Noether's method of sample size determination for the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, Biometrical Journal, 39, 823–829 crossref(new window)

Wang, H., Chen, B. and Chow, S. C. (2003). Sample size determination based on rank tests in clinical trials, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 13, 735–751 crossref(new window)

Wetherill, G. B. (1960). The Wilcoxon test and non-null hypotheses, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 22, 402–418

Zhao, Y. D., Rahardja, D. and Qu, Y. (2008). Sample size calculation for the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test adjusting for ties, Statistics in Medicine, 27, 462–468 crossref(new window)