Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpreting Interaction: The Classical Approach

  • Published:
Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a variety of issues in the design and analysis of multiclinic trials, focusing in particular on the detection and interpretation of treatment-by-clinic interaction. First Fleiss, which represents the classical approach and covers such issues as pooling the data, fixed versus random effects, and the analysis of main effects in the presence of interaction, is reviewed. Next, different methods for distinguishing quantitative from qualitative interaction are reviewed, and the influence of scale transformations on the interpretation of interaction is discussed. Finally, nonparametric procedures for detecting treatment-by-center interaction are reviewed and the advantages of the ImanJ Conover-type ranking procedure are described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleiss JL. Analysis of data from multiclinic trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:267–275.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ciminera JL, Heyse JF, Nguyen HH, Tukey JW. Evaluation of multicentre clinical trial data using adaptations of the Mosteller-Tukey procedure. Stat Med. 1993a;12:1047–1061.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mosteller F, Tukey JW. Combination of results of stated precision: I. The optimistic case. Utilitas Mathe. 1982;21A:155–178.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mosteller F, Tukey JW. Combination of results of stated precision: II. A more realistic case. In W. G. Cochran’s Impact on Statistics. Rao PSRS, Sedransk J, eds. New York: Wiley; 1984;223–252.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Overall JE. General linear model analysis of variance. In: Coordinating Clinical Trials in Psycho-pharmacology: Planning, Documentation, and Analysis. Levine J, ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gail M, Simon R. Testing for qualitative interactions between treatment effects and patient subjects. Biometrics. 1985;41:361–372.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ciminera JL, Heyse JF, Nguyen HH, Tukey JW. Tests for qualitative treatment-by-centre interaction using a ‘Pushback’ procedure. Stat Med. 1993b; 12: 1033–1045.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Conover WJ. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hora SC, Conover WJ. The F statistic in the two-way layout with rank-score transformed data. J Am Stat Assoc. 1984;79:668–673.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Akritas MG. The rank transform method in some two-factor designs. J Am Stat Assoc. 1990;85:73–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Merck Research Laboratories, BL-3, West Point, PA, 19486, USA

    Steven M. Snapinn

Authors
  1. Steven M. Snapinn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Snapinn, S.M. Interpreting Interaction: The Classical Approach. Ther Innov Regul Sci 32, 433–438 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1177/009286159803200214

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009286159803200214

Key Words

Search

Navigation