Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 25, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
On the covariate-adjusted estimation for an overall treatment difference with data from a randomized comparative
Lu Tian1, Tianxi Cai, Lihui Zhao
1Department of Health Research & Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Abstract:
To estimate an overall treatment difference with data from a randomized comparative clinical study, baseline covariates are often utilized to increase the estimation precision. Using the standard analysis of covariance technique for making inferences about such an average treatment difference may not be appropriate, especially when the fitted model is nonlinear. On the other hand, the novel augmentation procedure recently studied, for example, by Zhang and others (2008. Improving efficiency of inferences in randomized clinical trials using auxiliary covariates. Biometrics 64, 707-715) is quite flexible. However, in general, it is not clear how to select covariates for augmentation effectively. An overly adjusted estimator may inflate the variance and in some cases be biased. Furthermore, the results from the standard inference procedure by ignoring the sampling variation from the variable selection process may not be valid. In this paper, we first propose an estimation procedure, which augments the simple treatment contrast estimator directly with covariates. The new proposal is asymptotically equivalent to the aforementioned augmentation method. To select covariates, we utilize the standard lasso procedure. Furthermore, to make valid inference from the resulting lasso-type estimator, a cross validation method is used. The validity of the new proposal is justified theoretically and empirically. We illustrate the procedure extensively with a well-known primary biliary cirrhosis clinical trial data set.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Blinding
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
