PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Simon L Turner
AU  - Andrew B Forbes
AU  - Amalia Karahalios
AU  - Monica Taljaard
AU  - Joanne E McKenzie
TI  - Evaluation of statistical methods used in the analysis of interrupted time series studies: a simulation study
AID  - 10.1101/2020.10.12.20211706
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.10.12.20211706
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/14/2020.10.12.20211706.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/14/2020.10.12.20211706.full
AB  - Interrupted time series (ITS) studies are frequently used to evaluate the effects of population-level interventions or exposures. To our knowledge, no studies have compared the performance of different statistical methods for this design. We simulated data to compare the performance of a set of statistical methods under a range of scenarios which included different level and slope changes, varying lengths of series and magnitudes of autocorrelation. We also examined the performance of the Durbin-Watson (DW) test for detecting autocorrelation. All methods yielded unbiased estimates of the level and slope changes over all scenarios. The magnitude of autocorrelation was underestimated by all methods, however, restricted maximum likelihood (REML) yielded the least biased estimates. Underestimation of autocorrelation led to standard errors that were too small and coverage less than the nominal 95%. All methods performed better with longer time series, except for ordinary least squares (OLS) in the presence of autocorrelation and Newey-West for high values of autocorrelation. The DW test for the presence of autocorrelation performed poorly except for long series and large autocorrelation. From the methods evaluated, OLS was the preferred method in series with fewer than 12 points, while in longer series, REML was preferred. The DW test should not be relied upon to detect autocorrelation, except when the series is long. Care is needed when interpreting results from all methods, given confidence intervals will generally be too narrow. Further research is required to develop better performing methods for ITS, especially for short series.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) project grant (1145273). SLT was funded through an Australian Postgraduate Award administered through Monash University, Australia. JEM is supported by an NHMRC Career Development Fellowship (1143429). The funders had no role in study design, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:None required as this is a methodological simulation study.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data that supports the findings of this study were generated by the simulation code available in the supplementary material of this article.