ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
One of the main goals of sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials (SMART) is to find the most efficacious design embedded dynamic treatment regimes. The analysis method known as multiple comparisons with the best (MCB) allows comparison between dynamic treatment regimes and identification of a set of optimal regimes in the frequentist setting for continuous outcomes, thereby, directly addressing the main goal of a SMART. In this paper, we develop a Bayesian generalization to MCB for SMARTs with binary outcomes. Furthermore, we show how to choose the sample size so that the inferior embedded DTRs are screened out with a specified power. We compare log-odds between different DTRs using their exact distribution without relying on asymptotic normality in either the analysis or the power calculation. We conduct extensive simulation studies under two SMART designs and illustrate our methods application to the Adaptive Treatment for Alcohol and Cocaine Dependence (ENGAGE) trial.
In many health domains such as substance-use, outcomes are often counts with an excessive number of zeros (EZ) - count data having zero counts at a rate significantly higher than that expected of a standard count distribution (e.g., Poisson). However
The development of a new diagnostic test ideally follows a sequence of stages which, amongst other aims, evaluate technical performance. This includes an analytical validity study, a diagnostic accuracy study and an interventional clinical utility st
Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMARTs) are considered the gold standard for estimation and evaluation of treatment regimes. SMARTs are typically sized to ensure sufficient power for a simple comparison, e.g., the comparison of two
This paper develops Bayesian sample size formulae for experiments comparing two groups. We assume the experimental data will be analysed in the Bayesian framework, where pre-experimental information from multiple sources can be represented into robus
Manufacturers are required to demonstrate products meet reliability targets. A typical way to achieve this is with reliability demonstration tests (RDTs), in which a number of products are put on test and the test is passed if a target reliability is