Literature DB >> 30555200

Design and Analysis Considerations for Comparing Dynamic Treatment Regimens with Binary Outcomes from Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials.

Kelley M Kidwell1, Nicholas J Seewald2, Qui Tran1, Connie Kasari3, Daniel Almirall4.   

Abstract

In behavioral, educational and medical practice, interventions are often personalized over time using strategies that are based on individual behaviors and characteristics and changes in symptoms, severity, or adherence that are a result of one's treatment. Such strategies that more closely mimic real practice, are known as dynamic treatment regimens (DTRs). A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) is a multi-stage trial design that can be used to construct effective DTRs. This article reviews a simple to use 'weighted and replicated' estimation technique for comparing DTRs embedded in a SMART design using logistic regression for a binary, end-of-study outcome variable. Based on a Wald test that compares two embedded DTRs of interest from the 'weighted and replicated' regression model, a sample size calculation is presented with a corresponding user-friendly applet to aid in the process of designing a SMART. The analytic models and sample size calculations are presented for three of the more commonly used two-stage SMART designs. Simulations for the sample size calculation show the empirical power reaches expected levels. A data analysis example with corresponding code is presented in the appendix using data from a SMART developing an effective DTR in autism.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptive interventions; Dynamic treatment regimes; Inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting; Sequential multiple assignment randomized trial; sample size

Year:  2017        PMID: 30555200      PMCID: PMC6290910          DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2017.1386773

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Stat        ISSN: 0266-4763            Impact factor:   1.404


  7 in total

1.  Power analysis in a SMART design: sample size estimation for determining the best embedded dynamic treatment regime.

Authors:  William J Artman; Inbal Nahum-Shani; Tianshuang Wu; James R Mckay; Ashkan Ertefaie
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Bayesian set of best dynamic treatment regimes: Construction and sample size calculation for SMARTs with binary outcomes.

Authors:  William J Artman; Brent A Johnson; Kevin G Lynch; James R McKay; Ashkan Ertefaie
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-02-06       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 3.  Sample size considerations for comparing dynamic treatment regimens in a sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial with a continuous longitudinal outcome.

Authors:  Nicholas J Seewald; Kelley M Kidwell; Inbal Nahum-Shani; Tianshuang Wu; James R McKay; Daniel Almirall
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 3.021

4.  Optimal allocation to treatments in a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial.

Authors:  Andrea Morciano; Mirjam Moerbeek
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2021-09-23       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Low-touch, team-based care for co-morbidity management in cancer patients: the ONE TEAM randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Leah L Zullig; Mohammad Shahsahebi; Benjamin Neely; Terry Hyslop; Renee A V Avecilla; Brittany M Griffin; Kacey Clayton-Stiglbauer; Theresa Coles; Lynda Owen; Bryce B Reeve; Kevin Shah; Rebecca A Shelby; Linda Sutton; Michaela A Dinan; S Yousuf Zafar; Nishant P Shah; Susan Dent; Kevin C Oeffinger
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2021-11-18       Impact factor: 2.497

6.  Optimization of a new adaptive intervention using the SMART Design to increase COVID-19 testing among people at high risk in an urban community.

Authors:  Liliane Windsor; Ellen Benoit; Rogério M Pinto; Jesus Sarol
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 2.728

7.  Dynamic treatment regimens in small n, sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials: An application in focal segmental glomerulosclerosis.

Authors:  Yan-Cheng Chao; Howard Trachtman; Debbie S Gipson; Cathie Spino; Thomas M Braun; Kelley M Kidwell
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 2.226

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.