Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Optimal restricted two-stage designs.

L D Case, T M Morgan, C E Davis

    Controlled Clinical Trials
    |June 1, 1987
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Group sequential designs can cause confusion. New two-stage designs offer clear interpretation of results, minimizing sample size while maintaining statistical integrity for clinical trials.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Standardizing time-to-event reporting in single-arm BCG-unresponsive registration trials: a case for Kaplan-Meier.

    Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2025
    Same author

    Durable benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in metastatic prostate cancer in routine practice: biomarker associations and implications for optimal clinical next-generation sequencing testing.

    ESMO open·2024
    Same author

    Prognostic value of plasma circulating tumor DNA fraction across four common cancer types: a real-world outcomes study.

    Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2022
    Same author

    Corrigendum to "Nomogram Predicting Bladder Cancer-specific Mortality After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of an International Consortium" [Eur Urol Focus 2021;7:1347-54].

    European urology focus·2022
    Same author

    Developing a Patient-Centered Model of Prostate Cancer Care: Patient Satisfaction With a Survivorship Program Embedded in Urologic-Oncologic Care.

    Urology·2021
    Same author

    Impact of COVID-19 on surgical training.

    The British journal of surgery·2021
    Same journal

    On the generation and ownership of alpha in medical studies.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    Same journal

    An analysis of the effect of funding source in randomized clinical trials of second generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    Same journal

    Symptom recording in a randomised clinical trial: paper diaries vs. electronic or telephone data capture.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    Same journal

    Statistical comparison of random allocation methods in cancer clinical trials.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    Same journal

    Analyzing bronchodilation with emphasis on disease type, age and sex.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    Same journal

    Geographic variability in patient characteristics, treatment and outcome in an International Trial of Magnesium in acute myocardial infarction.

    Controlled clinical trials·2004
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Biostatistics
    • Clinical Trial Design
    • Statistical Inference

    Background:

    • Group sequential designs can yield significant final-stage p-values with nonsignificant overall trial p-values, causing interpretation challenges.
    • Reporting and interpreting results from group sequential designs requires careful consideration of interim analyses and overall trial outcomes.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To present novel two-stage clinical trial designs that resolve interpretation issues associated with group sequential methods.
    • To develop optimized two-stage designs that minimize expected sample size under various hypotheses while retaining fixed sample critical values.

    Main Methods:

    • Introduced two-stage designs allowing early decision-making (accept, reject, continue) at the first stage.
    • Optimized these designs to minimize expected sample size (under null, alternative, or maximum) subject to retaining the fixed sample critical value at the second stage.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluated the efficiency of these restricted designs compared to unrestricted two-stage designs.

    • Main Results:

    • The proposed restricted two-stage designs are nearly as efficient as optimal unrestricted two-stage designs.
    • These designs facilitate the interpretation of final-stage hypothesis tests as if a fixed sample design were used.
    • Examples demonstrate practical application in clinical trial design and analysis.

    Conclusions:

    • Restricted two-stage designs offer a practical solution to the interpretation challenges posed by group sequential designs in clinical trials.
    • These designs provide a balance between statistical efficiency and clear interpretability of trial results.
    • The presented methodology enhances the robustness and clarity of clinical trial reporting and decision-making.