IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v79y2009i1p16-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of design-adaptive allocation on inference for a regression parameter: Two-group, single-covariate and double-covariate cases

Author

Listed:
  • Aickin, Mikel

Abstract

Assignment to treatment group by randomization has been advocated with great success in biomedical trials. Research on optimal experimental design suggests, however, that it should be possible to obtain efficiency gains over randomization by balancing treatment groups with regard to prognostic factors. The only practical way of doing this involves sequential allocation to treatment that evolves during the recruitment period, but any such method has been questioned on the grounds that statistical inference using the estimated treatment effect is suspect. Results reported here show by means of a regression simulation that the estimate obtained from a dynamically balanced trial is unbiased, and a new estimate of its standard deviation is similarly shown to be unbiased. If one does not adjust for the balancing factors in the analysis, then randomization is frequently unacceptably inefficient. If one does adjust, then the efficiency advantage of balancing is modest on average, but still important in an appreciable fraction of trials with small sample sizes.

Suggested Citation

  • Aickin, Mikel, 2009. "Effect of design-adaptive allocation on inference for a regression parameter: Two-group, single-covariate and double-covariate cases," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 16-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:79:y:2009:i:1:p:16-20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7152(08)00296-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:79:y:2009:i:1:p:16-20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.