Next Article in Journal
COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Substance Misuse: A Social Media Listening, Mixed Method Analysis
Next Article in Special Issue
Gender Differences in Misdiagnosis and Delayed Diagnosis among Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder with No Language or Intellectual Disability
Previous Article in Journal
Utility of Transcranial Magnetic Simulation in Studying Upper Motor Neuron Dysfunction in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Pilot Study on Covid and Autism: Prevalence, Clinical Presentation and Vaccine Side Effects
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Imputing the Number of Responders from the Mean and Standard Deviation of CGI-Improvement in Clinical Trials Investigating Medications for Autism Spectrum Disorder

1
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, 81675 Munich, Germany
2
Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Psychiatric Clinic University Hospital ‘Gaspare Rodolico’, University of Catania, 95125 Catania, Italy
3
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Mardin State Hospital, 47100 Artuklu, Mardin, Turkey
4
Department of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK
5
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, 28003 Madrid, Spain
6
School of Medicine, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2021, 11(7), 908; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11070908
Submission received: 8 June 2021 / Revised: 5 July 2021 / Accepted: 7 July 2021 / Published: 9 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Understanding Autism Spectrum Disorder)

Abstract

Introduction: Response to treatment, according to Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale, is an easily interpretable outcome in clinical trials of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Yet, the CGI-I rating is sometimes reported as a continuous outcome, and converting it to dichotomous would allow meta-analysis to incorporate more evidence. Methods: Clinical trials investigating medications for ASD and presenting both dichotomous and continuous CGI-I data were included. The number of patients with at least much improvement (CGI-I ≤ 2) were imputed from the CGI-I scale, assuming an underlying normal distribution of a latent continuous score using a primary threshold θ = 2.5 instead of θ = 2, which is the original cut-off in the CGI-I scale. The original and imputed values were used to calculate responder rates and odds ratios. The performance of the imputation method was investigated with a concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), linear regression, Bland–Altman plots, and subgroup differences of summary estimates obtained from random-effects meta-analysis. Results: Data from 27 studies, 58 arms, and 1428 participants were used. The imputation method using the primary threshold (θ = 2.5) had good performance for the responder rates (CCC = 0.93 95% confidence intervals [0.86, 0.96]; β of linear regression = 1.04 [0.95, 1.13]; bias and limits of agreements = 4.32% [−8.1%, 16.74%]; no subgroup differences χ2 = 1.24, p-value = 0.266) and odds ratios (CCC = 0.91 [0.86, 0.96]; β = 0.96 [0.78, 1.14]; bias = 0.09 [−0.87, 1.04]; χ2 = 0.02, p-value = 0.894). The imputation method had poorer performance when the secondary threshold (θ = 2) was used. Discussion: Assuming a normal distribution of the CGI-I scale, the number of responders could be imputed from the mean and standard deviation and used in meta-analysis. Due to the wide limits of agreement of the imputation method, sensitivity analysis excluding studies with imputed values should be performed.
Keywords: response; meta-analysis; continuous outcomes; dichotomous outcomes response; meta-analysis; continuous outcomes; dichotomous outcomes

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Siafis, S.; Rodolico, A.; Çıray, O.; Murphy, D.G.; Parellada, M.; Arango, C.; Leucht, S. Imputing the Number of Responders from the Mean and Standard Deviation of CGI-Improvement in Clinical Trials Investigating Medications for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 908. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11070908

AMA Style

Siafis S, Rodolico A, Çıray O, Murphy DG, Parellada M, Arango C, Leucht S. Imputing the Number of Responders from the Mean and Standard Deviation of CGI-Improvement in Clinical Trials Investigating Medications for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Brain Sciences. 2021; 11(7):908. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11070908

Chicago/Turabian Style

Siafis, Spyridon, Alessandro Rodolico, Oğulcan Çıray, Declan G. Murphy, Mara Parellada, Celso Arango, and Stefan Leucht. 2021. "Imputing the Number of Responders from the Mean and Standard Deviation of CGI-Improvement in Clinical Trials Investigating Medications for Autism Spectrum Disorder" Brain Sciences 11, no. 7: 908. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11070908

APA Style

Siafis, S., Rodolico, A., Çıray, O., Murphy, D. G., Parellada, M., Arango, C., & Leucht, S. (2021). Imputing the Number of Responders from the Mean and Standard Deviation of CGI-Improvement in Clinical Trials Investigating Medications for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Brain Sciences, 11(7), 908. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11070908

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop