Estimation of treatment preference effects in clinical trials when some participants are indifferent to treatment choice
Stephen D Walter1, Robin M Turner2, Petra Macaskill3
1Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, CRL 233, Hamilton, ON, Canada, L8N 3Z5. walter@mcmaster.ca.
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.
More Related Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types 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,...
01:16Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
01:15Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
01:11Blinding
01:54The Placebo Effect
01:12Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...