Inclusive designs that allow the inclusion of a broader population in randomized controlled trials: An evaluation of randomization ratio and analysis strategy.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Statistical Methods in Medical Research Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-21 DOI:10.1177/09622802261475687
Kim May Lee, Ziyan Wang, Richard Emsley, Nigel Stallard
{"title":"Inclusive designs that allow the inclusion of a broader population in randomized controlled trials: An evaluation of randomization ratio and analysis strategy.","authors":"Kim May Lee, Ziyan Wang, Richard Emsley, Nigel Stallard","doi":"10.1177/09622802261475687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In most multi-arm randomized controlled trials, all participants need to be eligible to be randomized to all the arms. This means some participants are excluded from participating in multi-arm studies. We propose to relax this by considering a 'differential randomization' approach that allows the inclusion of participants who are eligible for some but not all arms, as in some innovative trial approaches. We refer to a multi-arm design that employs differential randomization as an 'inclusive design' because it maximizes participant inclusion. Considering superiority comparisons for a normal endpoint, we evaluate the performance of some analysis methods for a three-arm inclusive design by simulation studies. Methods include pairwise or overall regression analysis, an averaging approach that pools summary statistics using prevalence rate, and a meta-analysis type framework. We compare the statistical power when the inclusive design employs different treatment allocation schemes. We find that using equal allocation ratio within each subpopulation leads to a higher disjunctive power than using equal allocation across arms, when the many-to-one comparisons are analysed using the corresponding pairwise data separately as opposed to using all data in a single regression analysis. We find that differential covariate-outcome relations among patients can affect the property of the inference.</p>","PeriodicalId":22038,"journal":{"name":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","volume":" ","pages":"2095-2115"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802261475687","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In most multi-arm randomized controlled trials, all participants need to be eligible to be randomized to all the arms. This means some participants are excluded from participating in multi-arm studies. We propose to relax this by considering a 'differential randomization' approach that allows the inclusion of participants who are eligible for some but not all arms, as in some innovative trial approaches. We refer to a multi-arm design that employs differential randomization as an 'inclusive design' because it maximizes participant inclusion. Considering superiority comparisons for a normal endpoint, we evaluate the performance of some analysis methods for a three-arm inclusive design by simulation studies. Methods include pairwise or overall regression analysis, an averaging approach that pools summary statistics using prevalence rate, and a meta-analysis type framework. We compare the statistical power when the inclusive design employs different treatment allocation schemes. We find that using equal allocation ratio within each subpopulation leads to a higher disjunctive power than using equal allocation across arms, when the many-to-one comparisons are analysed using the corresponding pairwise data separately as opposed to using all data in a single regression analysis. We find that differential covariate-outcome relations among patients can affect the property of the inference.

允许在随机对照试验中纳入更广泛人群的包容性设计:随机化比例和分析策略的评估。
在大多数多组随机对照试验中,所有参与者都需要有资格被随机分配到所有组。这意味着一些参与者被排除在多组研究之外。我们建议通过考虑一种“差异随机化”方法来放宽这一限制,该方法允许纳入符合某些条件但不是所有条件的参与者,就像在一些创新试验方法中一样。我们将采用差异随机化的多组设计称为“包容性设计”,因为它最大化了参与者的包容性。考虑到正常终点的优势比较,我们通过模拟研究评估了三臂纳入设计的一些分析方法的性能。方法包括两两或整体回归分析,使用患病率汇总汇总统计的平均方法,以及元分析类型框架。我们比较了包容性设计采用不同待遇分配方案时的统计效力。我们发现,当分别使用相应的成对数据进行多对一比较分析而不是在单一回归分析中使用所有数据时,在每个亚种群中使用相等的分配比例比在各个分支中使用相等的分配比例导致更高的析取能力。我们发现患者之间的微分协变量-结果关系会影响推理的性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
Statistical Methods in Medical Research 医学-数学与计算生物学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
127
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Statistical Methods in Medical Research is a peer reviewed scholarly journal and is the leading vehicle for articles in all the main areas of medical statistics and an essential reference for all medical statisticians. This unique journal is devoted solely to statistics and medicine and aims to keep professionals abreast of the many powerful statistical techniques now available to the medical profession. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书