Cargando…
Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice
BACKGROUND: In the two-stage randomised trial design, a randomly sampled subset of study participants are permitted to choose their own treatment, while the remaining participants are randomised to treatment in the usual way. Appropriate analysis of the data from both arms of the study allows invest...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5319089/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28219326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0304-x |
_version_ | 1782509315022651392 |
---|---|
author | Walter, Stephen D. Turner, Robin M. Macaskill, Petra McCaffery, Kirsten J. Irwig, Les |
author_facet | Walter, Stephen D. Turner, Robin M. Macaskill, Petra McCaffery, Kirsten J. Irwig, Les |
author_sort | Walter, Stephen D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the two-stage randomised trial design, a randomly sampled subset of study participants are permitted to choose their own treatment, while the remaining participants are randomised to treatment in the usual way. Appropriate analysis of the data from both arms of the study allows investigators to estimate the impact on study outcomes of treatment preferences that patients may have, in addition to evaluating the usual direct effect of treatment. In earlier work, we showed how to optimise this design by making a suitable choice of the proportion of participants who should be assigned to the choice arm of the trial. However, we ignored the possibility of some participants being indifferent to the treatments under study. In this paper, we extend our earlier work to consider the analysis of two-stage randomised trials when some participants have no treatment preference, even if they are assigned to the choice arm and allowed to choose. METHODS: We compare alternative characterisations of the response profiles of the indifferent or undecided participants, and derive estimates of the treatment and preference effects on study outcomes. We also present corresponding test statistics for these parameters. The methods are illustrated with data from a clinical trial contrasting medical and surgical interventions. RESULTS: Expressions are obtained to estimate and test the impact of treatment choices on study outcomes, as well as the impact of the actual treatment received. Contrasts are defined between patients with stated treatment preferences and those with no preference. Alternative assumptions concerning the outcomes of undecided participants are described, and an approach leading to unbiased estimation and testing is identified. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the two-stage design can provide important insights into determinants of study outcomes that are not identifiable with other designs. The design can remain attractive even in the presence of participants with no stated treatment preference. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0304-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5319089 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53190892017-02-24 Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice Walter, Stephen D. Turner, Robin M. Macaskill, Petra McCaffery, Kirsten J. Irwig, Les BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: In the two-stage randomised trial design, a randomly sampled subset of study participants are permitted to choose their own treatment, while the remaining participants are randomised to treatment in the usual way. Appropriate analysis of the data from both arms of the study allows investigators to estimate the impact on study outcomes of treatment preferences that patients may have, in addition to evaluating the usual direct effect of treatment. In earlier work, we showed how to optimise this design by making a suitable choice of the proportion of participants who should be assigned to the choice arm of the trial. However, we ignored the possibility of some participants being indifferent to the treatments under study. In this paper, we extend our earlier work to consider the analysis of two-stage randomised trials when some participants have no treatment preference, even if they are assigned to the choice arm and allowed to choose. METHODS: We compare alternative characterisations of the response profiles of the indifferent or undecided participants, and derive estimates of the treatment and preference effects on study outcomes. We also present corresponding test statistics for these parameters. The methods are illustrated with data from a clinical trial contrasting medical and surgical interventions. RESULTS: Expressions are obtained to estimate and test the impact of treatment choices on study outcomes, as well as the impact of the actual treatment received. Contrasts are defined between patients with stated treatment preferences and those with no preference. Alternative assumptions concerning the outcomes of undecided participants are described, and an approach leading to unbiased estimation and testing is identified. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the two-stage design can provide important insights into determinants of study outcomes that are not identifiable with other designs. The design can remain attractive even in the presence of participants with no stated treatment preference. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0304-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5319089/ /pubmed/28219326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0304-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Walter, Stephen D. Turner, Robin M. Macaskill, Petra McCaffery, Kirsten J. Irwig, Les Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title | Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title_full | Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title_fullStr | Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title_full_unstemmed | Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title_short | Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
title_sort | estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5319089/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28219326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0304-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walterstephend estimationoftreatmentpreferenceeffectsinclinicaltrialswhensomeparticipantsareindifferenttotreatmentchoice AT turnerrobinm estimationoftreatmentpreferenceeffectsinclinicaltrialswhensomeparticipantsareindifferenttotreatmentchoice AT macaskillpetra estimationoftreatmentpreferenceeffectsinclinicaltrialswhensomeparticipantsareindifferenttotreatmentchoice AT mccafferykirstenj estimationoftreatmentpreferenceeffectsinclinicaltrialswhensomeparticipantsareindifferenttotreatmentchoice AT irwigles estimationoftreatmentpreferenceeffectsinclinicaltrialswhensomeparticipantsareindifferenttotreatmentchoice |