Literature DB >> 7724909

Adaptive assignment versus balanced randomization in clinical trials: a decision analysis.

D A Berry1, S G Eick.   

Abstract

We compare balanced randomization with four adaptive treatment allocation procedures in a clinical trial involving two treatments. The objective is to treat as many patients in and out of the trial as effectively as possible. Randomization is a satisfactory solution to the decision problem when the disease in question is at least moderately common. Adaptive procedures are more difficult to use, but might play a role in clinical research when a substantial proportion of all patients with the disease are included in the trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7724909     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780140302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  47 in total

1.  Comparison of balanced and random allocation in clinical trials: a simulation study.

Authors:  M M Rovers; H Straatman; G A Zielhuis
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Adaptive randomization in a treatment study of patients with adverse karyotype acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Elihu H Estey
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Bayesian phase II adaptive randomization by jointly modeling time-to-event efficacy and binary toxicity.

Authors:  Xiudong Lei; Ying Yuan; Guosheng Yin
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2010-04-03       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.

Authors:  Munyaradzi Dimairo; Philip Pallmann; James Wason; Susan Todd; Thomas Jaki; Steven A Julious; Adrian P Mander; Christopher J Weir; Franz Koenig; Marc K Walton; Jon P Nicholl; Elizabeth Coates; Katie Biggs; Toshimitsu Hamasaki; Michael A Proschan; John A Scott; Yuki Ando; Daniel Hind; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2020-06-17

Review 5.  Biomarker-based adaptive trials for patients with glioblastoma--lessons from I-SPY 2.

Authors:  Brian M Alexander; Patrick Y Wen; Lorenzo Trippa; David A Reardon; Wai-Kwan Alfred Yung; Giovanni Parmigiani; Donald A Berry
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-07-14       Impact factor: 12.300

6.  Do commonly used clinical trial designs reflect clinical reality?

Authors:  Elihu Estey
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 9.941

Review 7.  Children's Oncology Group's 2013 blueprint for research: renal tumors.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Dome; Conrad V Fernandez; Elizabeth A Mullen; John A Kalapurakal; James I Geller; Vicki Huff; Eric J Gratias; David B Dix; Peter F Ehrlich; Geetika Khanna; Marcio H Malogolowkin; James R Anderson; Arlene Naranjo; Elizabeth J Perlman
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  Bandit solutions provide unified ethical models for randomized clinical trials and comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  William H Press
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Commentary on Hey and Kimmelman.

Authors:  J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  A simulation study for comparing testing statistics in response-adaptive randomization.

Authors:  Xuemin Gu; J Jack Lee
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-06-05       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.