Demonstrating similarity between compared groups--that is, equivalence or noninferiority of the outcome of one group to the outcome of another group--requires a different analytic approach than determining the difference between groups--that is, superiority of one group over another. Neither a statistically significant difference between groups (P < .05) nor a lack of significant difference (P ≥ .05) from conventional statistical tests provides answers about equivalence/noninferiority. Statistical testing of equivalence/noninferiority generally uses a confidence interval, where equivalence/noninferiority is claimed when the confidence interval of the difference in outcome between compared groups is within a predetermined equivalence/noninferiority margin that represents a clinically or scientifically acceptable range of differences and is typically described by Δ. The equivalence/noninferiority margin should be justified both clinically and statistically, considering the loss in the main outcome and the compensatory gain, and be chosen conservatively to avoid making a false claim of equivalence/noninferiority for an inferior outcome. Sample size estimation needs to be specified for equivalence/noninferiority design, considering Δ in addition to other general factors. The need for equivalence/noninferiority research studies is expected to increase in radiology, and a good understanding of the fundamental principles of the methodology will be helpful for conducting as well as for interpreting such studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahn et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: