对包含参与者治疗选择的试验进行基于可能性的推论

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Rouba Chahine , Inmaculada Aban
{"title":"对包含参与者治疗选择的试验进行基于可能性的推论","authors":"Rouba Chahine ,&nbsp;Inmaculada Aban","doi":"10.1016/j.conctc.2024.101306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard for clinical trials as they reduce bias and minimize variability between different arms of a study. One of the drawbacks of these designs is their lack of flexibility to incorporate participant’s treatment choice, which may reduce recruitment rates and/or reduce participant’s tolerance if they receive a non-preferred treatment. Designs incorporating choice allow a subset of participants to choose their preferred treatment. Most of the current methods to analyze these types of designs are based on an ANOVA approach that do not allow for inclusion of covariates in the model. In this paper, we propose an alternative approach based on likelihood methods that can be used with a broad class of distributions and allow for inclusion of covariates and multiple study arms in the model. Using simulations, we evaluate these methods for a variety of continuous and categorical outcomes. Finally, we illustrate these methods by analyzing change in six minute walking distance from a behavioral intervention study for women with heart disease.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37937,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","volume":"39 ","pages":"Article 101306"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245186542400053X/pdfft?md5=c5b13b3ff42ebdec7173e6f4cf936473&pid=1-s2.0-S245186542400053X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Likelihood based inferences for trials incorporating participant’s treatment choice\",\"authors\":\"Rouba Chahine ,&nbsp;Inmaculada Aban\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.conctc.2024.101306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard for clinical trials as they reduce bias and minimize variability between different arms of a study. One of the drawbacks of these designs is their lack of flexibility to incorporate participant’s treatment choice, which may reduce recruitment rates and/or reduce participant’s tolerance if they receive a non-preferred treatment. Designs incorporating choice allow a subset of participants to choose their preferred treatment. Most of the current methods to analyze these types of designs are based on an ANOVA approach that do not allow for inclusion of covariates in the model. In this paper, we propose an alternative approach based on likelihood methods that can be used with a broad class of distributions and allow for inclusion of covariates and multiple study arms in the model. Using simulations, we evaluate these methods for a variety of continuous and categorical outcomes. Finally, we illustrate these methods by analyzing change in six minute walking distance from a behavioral intervention study for women with heart disease.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37937,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications\",\"volume\":\"39 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101306\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245186542400053X/pdfft?md5=c5b13b3ff42ebdec7173e6f4cf936473&pid=1-s2.0-S245186542400053X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245186542400053X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245186542400053X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随机临床试验是临床试验的黄金标准,因为它可以减少偏差,并将研究中不同臂之间的变异性降至最低。这些设计的缺点之一是缺乏灵活性,无法纳入参与者的治疗选择,这可能会降低招募率和/或降低参与者对接受非首选治疗的耐受性。包含选择的设计允许一部分参与者选择他们喜欢的治疗方法。目前分析这类设计的大多数方法都是基于方差分析方法,无法在模型中加入协变量。在本文中,我们提出了一种基于似然法的替代方法,该方法可用于多种分布,并允许在模型中加入协变量和多研究臂。通过模拟,我们针对各种连续和分类结果对这些方法进行了评估。最后,我们通过分析一项针对女性心脏病患者的行为干预研究中六分钟步行距离的变化来说明这些方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Likelihood based inferences for trials incorporating participant’s treatment choice

Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard for clinical trials as they reduce bias and minimize variability between different arms of a study. One of the drawbacks of these designs is their lack of flexibility to incorporate participant’s treatment choice, which may reduce recruitment rates and/or reduce participant’s tolerance if they receive a non-preferred treatment. Designs incorporating choice allow a subset of participants to choose their preferred treatment. Most of the current methods to analyze these types of designs are based on an ANOVA approach that do not allow for inclusion of covariates in the model. In this paper, we propose an alternative approach based on likelihood methods that can be used with a broad class of distributions and allow for inclusion of covariates and multiple study arms in the model. Using simulations, we evaluate these methods for a variety of continuous and categorical outcomes. Finally, we illustrate these methods by analyzing change in six minute walking distance from a behavioral intervention study for women with heart disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
146
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is an international peer reviewed open access journal that publishes articles pertaining to all aspects of clinical trials, including, but not limited to, design, conduct, analysis, regulation and ethics. Manuscripts submitted should appeal to a readership drawn from a wide range of disciplines including medicine, life science, pharmaceutical science, biostatistics, epidemiology, computer science, management science, behavioral science, and bioethics. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is unique in that it is outside the confines of disease specifications, and it strives to increase the transparency of medical research and reduce publication bias by publishing scientifically valid original research findings irrespective of their perceived importance, significance or impact. Both randomized and non-randomized trials are within the scope of the Journal. Some common topics include trial design rationale and methods, operational methodologies and challenges, and positive and negative trial results. In addition to original research, the Journal also welcomes other types of communications including, but are not limited to, methodology reviews, perspectives and discussions. Through timely dissemination of advances in clinical trials, the goal of Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is to serve as a platform to enhance the communication and collaboration within the global clinical trials community that ultimately advances this field of research for the benefit of patients.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信