Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Acupuncture | Methodology

The correlation between baseline score and post-intervention score, and its implications for statistical analysis

Authors: Lei Clifton, David A. Clifton

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

When using a continuous outcome measure in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), the baseline score should be measured in addition to the post-intervention score, and it should be analysed using the appropriate statistical analysis.

Methods

We derive the correlation between the change score and baseline score and show that there is always a correlation (usually negative) between the change score and baseline score. We discuss the following correlations and provide the mathematical derivations in the Appendix:
  • Correlation between change score and baseline score
  • Correlation between change score and post score
  • Correlation between change score and average score.
The setting here is a parallel, two-arm RCT, but the method discussed in this paper is applicable for any studies or trials that have a continuous outcome measure; it is not restricted to RCTs.

Results

We show that using the change score as the outcome measure does not address the problem of regression to the mean, nor does it take account of the baseline imbalance. Whether the outcome is change score or post score, one should always adjust for baseline using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA); otherwise, the estimated treat effect may be biased. We show that these correlations also apply when comparing two measurement methods using Bland-Altman plots.

Conclusions

The correlation between baseline and post-intervention scores can be derived using the variance sum law. We can then use the derived correlation to calculate the required sample size in the design stage. Baseline imbalance may occur in RCTs, and ANCOVA should be used to adjust for baseline in the analysis stage.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ. 2005;330(7495):843.CrossRef Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ. 2005;330(7495):843.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Barnett AG, van der Pols JC, Dobson AJ. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(1):215–20.CrossRef Barnett AG, van der Pols JC, Dobson AJ. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(1):215–20.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307–10.CrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307–10.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG. Some examples of regression towards the mean. BMJ. 1994a;309(6957):780.CrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG. Some examples of regression towards the mean. BMJ. 1994a;309(6957):780.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistic notes: regression towards the mean. BMJ. 1994b;308(6942):1499.CrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistic notes: regression towards the mean. BMJ. 1994b;308(6942):1499.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet. 1995;346(8982):1085–7.CrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet. 1995;346(8982):1085–7.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Clifton L, Birks J, Clifton DA. Comparing different ways of calculating sample size for two independent means: a worked example. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018:100309. Clifton L, Birks J, Clifton DA. Comparing different ways of calculating sample size for two independent means: a worked example. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018:100309.
10.
go back to reference Galton F. Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature. J Anthropol Inst G B Irel. 1886;15:246–63. Galton F. Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature. J Anthropol Inst G B Irel. 1886;15:246–63.
11.
go back to reference Gill JS, Beevers DG, Zezulka AV, Davies P. Relation between initial blood pressure and its fall with treatment. Lancet. 1985;325(8428):567–9.CrossRef Gill JS, Beevers DG, Zezulka AV, Davies P. Relation between initial blood pressure and its fall with treatment. Lancet. 1985;325(8428):567–9.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kahan BC, Morris TP. Improper analysis of trials randomised using stratified blocks or minimisation. Stat Med. 2012;31(4):328–40.CrossRef Kahan BC, Morris TP. Improper analysis of trials randomised using stratified blocks or minimisation. Stat Med. 2012;31(4):328–40.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Laird N. Further comparative analyses of pretest-posttest research designs. Am Stat. 1983;37(4):329–30.CrossRef Laird N. Further comparative analyses of pretest-posttest research designs. Am Stat. 1983;37(4):329–30.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Pocock SJ, Bakris G, Bhatt DL, Brar S, Fahy M, Gersh BJ. Regression to the mean in SYMPLICITY HTN-3: implications for design and reporting of future trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(18):2016–25.CrossRef Pocock SJ, Bakris G, Bhatt DL, Brar S, Fahy M, Gersh BJ. Regression to the mean in SYMPLICITY HTN-3: implications for design and reporting of future trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(18):2016–25.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Vickers AJ. The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1(1):6.CrossRef Vickers AJ. The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1(1):6.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Vickers AJ, Altman DG. Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. BMJ. 2001;323(7321):1123.CrossRef Vickers AJ, Altman DG. Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. BMJ. 2001;323(7321):1123.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The correlation between baseline score and post-intervention score, and its implications for statistical analysis
Authors
Lei Clifton
David A. Clifton
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Acupuncture
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-3108-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Trials 1/2019 Go to the issue