Improving power with repeated measures: diet and serum lipids

The inability to detect associations between diet and serum cholesterol in cross-sectional population studies has been attributed to measurement error in diet assessments and between-subject variability in lipid concentrations. Current statistical methods can reduce the effects of measurement error...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of clinical nutrition 1998-05, Vol.67 (5), p.934-939
Hauptverfasser: Marshall, JA, Scarbro, S, Shetterly, SM, Jones, RH
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The inability to detect associations between diet and serum cholesterol in cross-sectional population studies has been attributed to measurement error in diet assessments and between-subject variability in lipid concentrations. Current statistical methods can reduce the effects of measurement error and allow within-subject comparisons when replicate measures on individuals are available, even if the time between replicates is as long as 4 y and replicate data are not available for all subjects. Data from 928 nondiabetic participants of the San Luis Valley Diabetes Study with measures of 24-h dietary intake and fasting lipid concentrations at baseline, at a 4-y follow-up visit, or both were analyzed in a random-effects model that allowed for an unbalanced design. Sex was included as a non-time-varying covariate and age, body mass index, and energy intake were included as time-varying covariates. The findings when LDL cholesterol (mmol/L) was regressed on saturated fat intake (20 g/d) with all observations in a random-effects model (beta = 0.14, P = 0.0016) were compared with results with observations restricted to the first visit only (beta = 0.05, P = 0.52), a balanced design using averages across visits (beta = -0.12, P = 0.28), and a balanced design with random effects obtained by excluding subjects without two observations (beta = 0.12, P = 0.0092). Study power was greatest in the random-effects model using all observations and time-varying covariates. These findings highlight the importance of even a single replicate observation on a subsample of subjects. We recommend analyzing all data rather than averaging measures across visits or omitting observations to create a balanced design.
ISSN:0002-9165
1938-3207
DOI:10.1093/ajcn/67.5.934