An Empirical Method for Analyzing Count Data
Jiren Sun, Linda Amoafo, Yongming Qu

TL;DR
This paper introduces an empirical method for analyzing count data in clinical trials that avoids distributional assumptions, providing a stable and robust alternative to negative binomial regression especially in sparse-event scenarios.
Contribution
The paper proposes a new empirical approach for comparing marginal event rates that is robust to overdispersion, zero inflation, and model misspecification, improving stability over NB regression.
Findings
Maintains appropriate Type I error control in diverse scenarios.
Achieves comparable power to NB regression.
Provides stable estimates in sparse-event data.
Abstract
Count endpoints are common in clinical trials, particularly for recurrent events such as hypoglycemia. When interest centers on comparing overall event rates between treatment groups, negative binomial (NB) regression is widely used because it accommodates overdispersion and requires only event counts and exposure times. However, NB regression can be numerically unstable when events are sparse, and the efficiency gains from baseline covariate adjustment may be sensitive to model misspecification. We propose an empirical method that targets the same marginal estimand as NB regression -- the ratio of marginal event rates -- while avoiding distributional assumptions on the count outcome. Simulation studies show that the empirical method maintains appropriate Type I error control across diverse scenarios, including extreme overdispersion and zero inflation, achieves power comparable to NB…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials · Advanced Causal Inference Techniques · Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
