Paired Samples Proportions

Validation

0.2.0

For paired samples proportions difference, tested with McNemar’s test, different software produces sligthly different parameters, so we compare PAMLj with different approach. We make comparisons G*Power, R MASS package, and vanilla R computation taken from powerandsamplesize.com we size. powerandsamplesize.com we size is particularly interesting because they show the actual code used to obtain the power parameters. We also compare the results with SPSS v29

The paired samples proportions difference is applied to a 2 X 2 table in which each cell define the proportion of pairs of cases in each combination of the two variables levels. The 2 X 2 table, cross-classifying factor A and factor B, looks like this:

A1 A2
B1 P11 P21
B2 P12 P22

In this table, \(P12\) and \(P21\) indicate the proportion of discordant cases, which total to \(D=P12+P21\). Now, PAMLj requires these two proportions as input, with the constraint that \(P21<P12\). Notice that the order of the factor level is arbitrary, so the constraint does not limit the application of the test. Gpower requires an odd ratio as input, which in this setup corresponds to \(Odd=P21/P12\), and the proportion of discordant cases, \(D=P12+P21\).

Example 1: Sample size

Setup

  • Aim = N
  • P1 = .32
  • P2 = .08
  • D = .40
  • Odd-ratio = 4
  • Power = .90
  • Alpha = .05
  • Tails = Two

PAMLj

The expected N is 69 (pairs).

R

powerandsamplesize.com we size

p12=0.32
p21=0.08

alpha=0.05*1 
beta=0.10
pdisc=p21+p12
pdiff=p12-p21
(n=((qnorm(1-alpha/2)*sqrt(pdisc)+qnorm(1-beta)*sqrt(pdisc-pdiff^2))/pdiff)^2)
## [1] 68.71646
ceiling(n) 
## [1] 69

Results are exactly the same.

MESS package

p12=0.32
p21=0.08

alpha=0.05
beta=0.10
MESS::power_mcnemar_test(psi=4,paid=p21,power=1-beta,method="normal",sig.level=.05)
## 
##      McNemar paired comparison of proportions approximate power calculation 
## 
##               n = 68.71646
##            paid = 0.08
##             psi = 4
##       sig.level = 0.05
##           power = 0.9
##     alternative = two.sided
## 
## NOTE: n is number of pairs

rounding we obtain \(N=69\).

G*Power

SPSS

So, all results converge to \(N=69\) but for GPower, which is offset of 1 unit.

Results

Require N
PAMLj 69
psw.com 69
MESS 69
GPower 70
SPSS 69

Example 2 : One-Tailed

Setup

  • Aim = N
  • P1 = .32
  • P2 = .08
  • D = .40
  • Odd-ratio = 4
  • Power = .90
  • Alpha = .05
  • Tails = One

PAMLj

The expected N is 56 (pairs).

R

MESS package

p12=0.32
p21=0.08

alpha=0.05
beta=0.10
MESS::power_mcnemar_test(psi=4,paid=p21,power=1-beta,method="normal",sig.level=.05,alternative="one.side")
## 
##      McNemar paired comparison of proportions approximate power calculation 
## 
##               n = 55.63893
##            paid = 0.08
##             psi = 4
##       sig.level = 0.05
##           power = 0.9
##     alternative = one.sided
## 
## NOTE: n is number of pairs

rounding we obtain \(N=56\).

G*Power

Again, GPower is slightly offset as compared with MESS::power_mcnemar_test() and PAMLj, but the results are basically the same.

SPSS

As above, SPSS is aligned with all other software but GPower, slightly offset.

Require N
PAMLj 56
MESS 56
GPower 58
SPSS 56

Return to main help pages

Main page PAMLj: rosetta Proportions difference

Comments?

Got comments, issues or spotted a bug? Please open an issue on PAMLj at github or send me an email