How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study

Abstract Background An increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have measured the impact of interventions on work productivity loss. Productivity loss outcome is inflated at zero and max loss values. Our study was to compare the performance of five commonly used methods in analysis o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wei Zhang, Huiying Sun
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-06-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01330-w
id doaj-5ddd4ac7cf3541a099a1666416f179f9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5ddd4ac7cf3541a099a1666416f179f92021-06-27T11:03:08ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882021-06-0121111110.1186/s12874-021-01330-wHow to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation studyWei Zhang0Huiying Sun1School of Population and Public Health, University of British ColumbiaCentre for Health Evaluation and Outcome SciencesAbstract Background An increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have measured the impact of interventions on work productivity loss. Productivity loss outcome is inflated at zero and max loss values. Our study was to compare the performance of five commonly used methods in analysis of productivity loss outcomes in RCTs. Methods We conducted a simulation study to compare Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Negative Binominal (NB), two-part models (the non-zero part following truncated NB distribution or gamma distribution) and three-part model (the middle part between zero and max values following Beta distribution). The main number of observations each arm, Nobs, that we considered were 50, 100 and 200. Baseline productivity loss was included as a covariate. Results All models performed similarly well when baseline productivity loss was set at the mean value. When baseline productivity loss was set at other values and Nobs = 50 with ≤5 subjects having max loss, two-part models performed best if the proportion of zero loss> 50% in at least one arm and otherwise, OLS performed best. When Nobs = 100 or 200, the three-part model performed best if the two arms had equal scale parameters for their productivity loss outcome distributions between zero and max values. Conclusions Our findings suggest that when treatment effect at any given values of one single covariate is of interest, the model selection depends on the sample size, the proportions of zero loss and max loss, and the scale parameter for the productivity loss outcome distribution between zero and max loss in each arm of RCTs.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01330-wProductivity lossAbsenteeismPresenteeismZero-inflated dataSimulation studiesRandomized controlled trial
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Wei Zhang
Huiying Sun
spellingShingle Wei Zhang
Huiying Sun
How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Productivity loss
Absenteeism
Presenteeism
Zero-inflated data
Simulation studies
Randomized controlled trial
author_facet Wei Zhang
Huiying Sun
author_sort Wei Zhang
title How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
title_short How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
title_full How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
title_fullStr How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
title_full_unstemmed How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study
title_sort how to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? a simulation study
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2021-06-01
description Abstract Background An increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have measured the impact of interventions on work productivity loss. Productivity loss outcome is inflated at zero and max loss values. Our study was to compare the performance of five commonly used methods in analysis of productivity loss outcomes in RCTs. Methods We conducted a simulation study to compare Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Negative Binominal (NB), two-part models (the non-zero part following truncated NB distribution or gamma distribution) and three-part model (the middle part between zero and max values following Beta distribution). The main number of observations each arm, Nobs, that we considered were 50, 100 and 200. Baseline productivity loss was included as a covariate. Results All models performed similarly well when baseline productivity loss was set at the mean value. When baseline productivity loss was set at other values and Nobs = 50 with ≤5 subjects having max loss, two-part models performed best if the proportion of zero loss> 50% in at least one arm and otherwise, OLS performed best. When Nobs = 100 or 200, the three-part model performed best if the two arms had equal scale parameters for their productivity loss outcome distributions between zero and max values. Conclusions Our findings suggest that when treatment effect at any given values of one single covariate is of interest, the model selection depends on the sample size, the proportions of zero loss and max loss, and the scale parameter for the productivity loss outcome distribution between zero and max loss in each arm of RCTs.
topic Productivity loss
Absenteeism
Presenteeism
Zero-inflated data
Simulation studies
Randomized controlled trial
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01330-w
work_keys_str_mv AT weizhang howtoanalyzeworkproductivitylossduetohealthproblemsinrandomizedcontrolledtrialsasimulationstudy
AT huiyingsun howtoanalyzeworkproductivitylossduetohealthproblemsinrandomizedcontrolledtrialsasimulationstudy
_version_ 1721358254984921088