271 research outputs found

    A Flexible Joint Longitudinal-Survival Model for Analysis of End-Stage Renal Disease Data

    Full text link
    We propose a flexible joint longitudinal-survival framework to examine the association between longitudinally collected biomarkers and a time-to-event endpoint. More specifically, we use our method for analyzing the survival outcome of end-stage renal disease patients with time-varying serum albumin measurements. Our proposed method is robust to common parametric assumptions in that it avoids explicit distributional assumptions on longitudinal measures and allows for subject-specific baseline hazard in the survival component. Fully joint estimation is performed to account for the uncertainty in the estimated longitudinal biomarkers included in the survival model

    Evaluating a Group Sequential Design in the Setting of Nonproportional Hazards

    Get PDF
    Group sequential methods have been widely described and implemented in a clinical trial setting where parametric and semiparametric models are deemed suitable. In these situations, the evaluation of the operating characteristics of a group sequential stopping rule remains relatively straightforward. However, in the presence of nonproportional hazards survival data nonparametric methods are often used, and the evaluation of stopping rules is no longer a trivial task. Specifically, nonparametric test statistics do not necessarily correspond to a parameter of clinical interest, thus making it difficult to characterize alternatives at which operating characteristics are to be computed. We describe an approach for constructing alternatives under nonproportional hazards using pre-existing pilot data, allowing one to evaluate various operating characteristics of candidate group sequential stopping rules. The method is illustrated via a case study in which testing is based upon a weighted logrank statistic

    Choosing the Right Approach at the Right Time: A Comparative Analysis of Casual Effect Estimation using Confounder Adjustment and Instrumental Variables

    Full text link
    In observational studies, unobserved confounding is a major barrier in isolating the average causal effect (ACE). In these scenarios, two main approaches are often used: confounder adjustment for causality (CAC) and instrumental variable analysis for causation (IVAC). Nevertheless, both are subject to untestable assumptions and, therefore, it may be unclear which assumption violation scenarios one method is superior in terms of mitigating inconsistency for the ACE. Although general guidelines exist, direct theoretical comparisons of the trade-offs between CAC and the IVAC assumptions are limited. Using ordinary least squares (OLS) for CAC and two-stage least squares (2SLS) for IVAC, we analytically compare the relative inconsistency for the ACE of each approach under a variety of assumption violation scenarios and discuss rules of thumb for practice. Additionally, a sensitivity framework is proposed to guide analysts in determining which approach may result in less inconsistency for estimating the ACE with a given dataset. We demonstrate our findings both through simulation and an application examining whether maternal stress during pregnancy affects a neonate's birthweight. The implications of our findings for causal inference practice are discussed, providing guidance for analysts for judging whether CAC or IVAC may be more appropriate for a given situation

    An Alternative Perspective on Consensus Priors with Applications to Phase I Clinical Trials

    Get PDF
    We occasionally need to make a decision or a series of decisions based on a small sample. In some cases, an investigator is knowledgeable about a parameter of interest in some degrees or is accessible to various sources of prior information. Yet, two or more experts cannot have an identical prior distribution for the parameter. In this manuscript, we discuss the use of a consensus prior and compare two classes of Bayes estimators. In the first class of Bayes estimators, the contribution of each prior opinion is determined by observing data. In the second class, the contribution of each prior opinion is determined after observing data. Bayesian designs for Phase I clinical trials allocate trial participants at new experimental doses based on accumulated information, while the typical sample sizes are fairly small. Using simulations, we illustrate the usefulness of a combined estimate in the early phase clinical trials

    A Bayesian Framework for Non-Collapsible Models

    Full text link
    In this paper, we discuss the non-collapsibility concept and propose a new approach based on Dirichlet process mixtures to estimate the conditional effect of covariates in non-collapsible models. Using synthetic data, we evaluate the performance of our proposed method and examine its sensitivity under different settings. We also apply our method to real data on access failure among hemodialysis patients

    Frequentist Evaluation of Group Sequential Clinical Trial Designs

    Get PDF
    Group sequential stopping rules are often used as guidelines in the monitoring of clinical trials in order to address the ethical and efficiency issues inherent in human testing of a new treatment or preventive agent for disease. Such stopping rules have been proposed based on a variety of different criteria, both scientific (e.g., estimates of treatment effect) and statistical (e.g., frequentist type I error, Bayesian posterior probabilities, stochastic curtailment). It is easily shown, however, that a stopping rule based on one of those criteria induces a stopping rule on all other criteria. Thus the basis used to initially define a stopping rule is relatively unimportant so long as the operating characteristics of the stopping rule are fully investigated. In this paper we describe how the frequentist operating characteristics of a particular stopping rule might be evaluated in order to ensure that the selected clinical trial design satisfies the constraints imposed by the many different disciplines represented by the clinical trial collaborators

    Bayesian Evaluation of Group Sequential Clinical Trial Designs

    Get PDF
    Clincal trial designs often incorporate a sequential stopping rule to serve as a guide in the early termination of a study. When choosing a particular stopping rule, it is most common to examine frequentist operating characteristics such as type I error, statistical power, and precision of confi- dence intervals (Emerson, et al. [1]). Increasingly, however, clinical trials are designed and analyzed in the Bayesian paradigm. In this paper we describe how the Bayesian operating characteristics of a particular stopping rule might be evaluated and communicated to the scientific community. In particular, we consider a choice of probability models and a family of prior distributions that allows concise presentation of Bayesian properties for a specified sampling plan

    Assessing Health Care Interventions via an Interrupted Time Series Model: Study Power and Design Considerations

    Full text link
    The delivery and assessment of quality health care is complex with many interacting and interdependent components. In terms of research design and statistical analysis, this complexity and interdependency makes it difficult to assess the true impact of interventions designed to improve patient health care outcomes. Interrupted time series (ITS) is a quasi-experimental design developed for inferring the effectiveness of a health policy intervention while accounting for temporal dependence within a single system or unit. Current standardized ITS methods do not simultaneously analyze data for several units, nor are there methods to test for the existence of a change point and to assess statistical power for study planning purposes in this context. To address this limitation we propose the `Robust Multiple ITS' (R-MITS) model, appropriate for multi-unit ITS data, that allows for inference regarding the estimation of a global change point across units in the presence of a potentially lagged (or anticipatory) treatment effect. Under the R-MITS model, one can formally test for the existence of a change point and estimate the time delay between the formal intervention implementation and the over-all-unit intervention effect. We conducted empirical simulation studies to assess the type one error rate of the testing procedure, power for detecting specified change-point alternatives, and accuracy of the proposed estimating methodology. R-MITS is illustrated by analyzing patient satisfaction data from a hospital that implemented and evaluated a new care delivery model in multiple units.Comment: 41 pages, 6 figures, 5 table
    • …
    corecore