PubMed · 12017393
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Louis Lasagna. 2002. Statistical uncertainty.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2918(02)85124-4
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This paper introduces a simple futility design that allows a comparative clinical trial to be stopped due to lack of effect at any of a series of planned interim analyses. Stopping due to apparent benefit is not permitted. The design is for use when any positive claim should be based on the maximum sample size, for example to allow subgroup analyses or the evaluation of safety or secondary efficacy responses. A final frequentist analysis can be performed that is valid for the type of design employed. Here the design is described and its properties are presented. Its advantages and disadvantages relative to the use of stochastic curtailment are discussed.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In this paper we discuss a design for multi-arm randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in which clinicians and their patients can selectively exclude one of the randomized treatment arms. This approach has the advantage that it should expedite protocol development, and allow easier and faster recruitment of patients into the trial. However, to preserve the randomized nature of treatment comparisons, not all recruited patients can be included in all treatment comparisons. This dictates that treatment arms are compared in a pairwise fashion, and that the numbers of patients included in different treatment comparisons may not be equal. The total trial size of a multi-arm RCT that allowed selective exclusion of arms would be greater than the size of an equivalent standard multi-arm RCT. However, the duration of time taken to recruit the study would be reduced. The implications for the design, monitoring and analysis of such RCTs are discussed.