paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

Increasing the efficiency of randomized trial estimates via linear adjustment for a prognostic score

2020-12-17 · Alejandro Schuler, David Walsh, Diana Hall, Jon Walsh, Charles Fisher

Estimating causal effects from randomized experiments is central to clinical research. Reducing the statistical uncertainty in these analyses is an important objective for statisticians. Registries, prior trials, and health records constitute a growing compendium of historical data on patients under standard-of-care that may be exploitable to this end. However, most methods for historical borrowing achieve reductions in variance by sacrificing strict type-I error rate control. Here, we propose a use of historical data that exploits linear covariate adjustment to improve the efficiency of trial analyses without incurring bias. Specifically, we train a prognostic model on the historical data, then estimate the treatment effect using a linear regression while adjusting for the trial subjects' predicted outcomes (their prognostic scores). We prove that, under certain conditions, this prognostic covariate adjustment procedure attains the minimum variance possible among a large class of estimators. When those conditions are not met, prognostic covariate adjustment is still more efficient than raw covariate adjustment and the gain in efficiency is proportional to a measure of the predictive accuracy of the prognostic model above and beyond the linear relationship with the raw covariates. We demonstrate the approach using simulations and a reanalysis of an Alzheimer's Disease clinical trial and observe meaningful reductions in mean-squared error and the estimated variance. Lastly, we provide a simplified formula for asymptotic variance that enables power calculations that account for these gains. Sample size reductions between 10% and 30% are attainable when using prognostic models that explain a clinically realistic percentage of the outcome variance.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2012.09935

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론

Linear Regression Linear Regression is a method for modelling a relationship between a dependent variable and independent variables. These models can be fit with numerous approaches. The most…

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Machine Learning Assisted Adjustment Boosts Efficiency of Exact Inference in Randomized Controlled Trials

2024-03-05 · Han Yu, Alan D. Hutson, Xiaoyi Ma

In this work, we proposed a novel inferential procedure assisted by machine learning based adjustment for randomized control trials. The method was developed under the Rosenbaum's framework of exact tests in randomized e…

Adaptive-TMLE for the Average Treatment Effect based on Randomized Controlled Trial Augmented with Real-World Data

2024-05-12 · Mark van der Laan, Sky Qiu, Jens Magelund Tarp, Lars van der Laan

We consider the problem of estimating the average treatment effect (ATE) when both randomized control trial (RCT) data and external real-world data (RWD) are available. We decompose the ATE estimand as the difference bet…

Two-Stage TMLE to Reduce Bias and Improve Efficiency in Cluster Randomized Trials

2021-06-29 · Laura B. Balzer, Mark van der Laan, James Ayieko, Moses Kamya 외

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) randomly assign an intervention to groups of individuals (e.g., clinics or communities) and measure outcomes on individuals in those groups. While offering many advantages, this experimen…

Experimental Design

Generalizing Clinical Trials with Convex Hulls

2021-11-25 · Eric V. Strobl, Thomas A. Lasko

Randomized clinical trials eliminate confounding but impose strict exclusion criteria that limit recruitment to a subset of the population. Observational datasets are more inclusive but suffer from confounding -- often p…

Adaptive Selection of the Optimal Strategy to Improve Precision and Power in Randomized Trials

2022-10-31 · Laura B. Balzer, Erica Cai, Lucas Godoy Garraza, Pracheta Amaranath

Benkeser et al. demonstrate how adjustment for baseline covariates in randomized trials can meaningfully improve precision for a variety of outcome types. Their findings build on a long history, starting in 1932 with R.A…