PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11550943

Compliance subsampling designs for comparative research: estimation and optimal planning.

Abstract

For studies with treatment noncompliance, analyses have been developed recently to better estimate treatment efficacy. However, the advantage and cost of measuring compliance data have implications on the study design that have not been as systematically explored. In order to estimate better treatment efficacy with lower cost, we propose a new class of compliance subsampling (CSS) designs where, after subjects are assigned treatment, compliance behavior is measured for only subgroups of subjects. The sizes of the subsamples are allowed to relate to the treatment assignment, the assignment probability, the total sample size, the anticipated distributions of outcome and compliance, and the cost parameters of the study. The CSS design methods relate to prior work (i) on two-phase designs in which a covariate is subsampled and (ii) on causal inference because the subsampled postrandomization compliance behavior is not the true covariate of interest. For each CSS design, we develop efficient estimation of treatment efficacy under binary outcome and all-or-none observed compliance. Then we derive a minimal cost CSS design that achieves a required precision for estimating treatment efficacy. We compare the properties of the CSS design to those of conventional protocols in a study of patient choices for medical care at the end of life.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C E Frangakis, S G Baker. 2001. Compliance subsampling designs for comparative research: estimation and optimal planning.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.00899.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

"Not-for-resuscitation" orders in Australian public hospitals: policies, standardised order forms and patient information leaflets.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and content of policies, standardised order forms (SOFs) and patient information leaflets (PILs) pertaining to "not-for-resuscitation" (NFR) orders in Australian public hospitals. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional postal survey conducted across Australia from August to December 2005, using a one-page questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS: Directors of Medical, Nursing or Clinical Services of all public hospitals in Australia with 60 or more beds, excluding psychiatric, military and private hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of documented NFR policies, by hospital characteristics, and content of these policies, SOFs and PILs. RESULTS: 222 hospitals were surveyed, and 157 responded (71%). Of these, 85 (54%) had NFR policies, 62 (39%) had SOFs, and four (3%) had PILs. Hospitals with more than 200 beds were more likely to have NFR policies than those with 60-200 beds (P = 0.04). More metropolitan than rural hospitals had NFR policies (P = 0.01). More hospitals with 60-100 beds had SOFs than hospitals with 101-200 beds (P = 0.03). "NFR" was defined in 53% of policies, while 97% of policies explicitly stated where NFR orders were to be documented, 89% stated who was allowed to make them, 37% stated that advanced care directives ("living wills") were to be respected, and 89% stated that competent patients should be involved in discussions regarding their NFR status. The most common items noted in SOFs were the name and signature of the issuing medical practitioner (92%) and documentation of the discussion with the patient (81%). CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation in the content of hospital policies, SOFs and PILs pertaining to NFR orders. Aspects of current policies show room for improvement.

Advance Directives↗

Modifications to advanced life support in renal failure.

The outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has been reported to be worse in patients with renal failure compared with those with normal renal function. It is likely that this increased mortality may be at least partly attributable to sub-optimal and highly variable treatment strategies used in cardiac arrest in patients with renal failure, but this issue has not previously been explored. Such patients undoubtedly pose a challenge to advanced life support (ALS) providers, and renal unit staff are not trained to provide specialist advice after a patient has sustained a cardiac arrest. There are few studies investigating the epidemiology, safety or outcome of cardiac arrest in patients with renal failure and there are no generally accepted resuscitation guidelines for this special circumstance. In this article we discuss the unique problems of resuscitating patients with renal failure and propose a suitable management strategy.

Advance Directives↗