Sequential boundaries approach in clinical trials with unequal allocation ratios

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 6, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Jafari, Peyman ^a   Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi ^a   Behboodian, Javad ^b  

^a SHIRAZ UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b SHIRAZ UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE STUDY; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; STATISTICS;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 33644550949     PISSN: 14712288     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-1     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Jennison C, Turnbull BW: Group Sequential Methods with Application to ClinicalTrials London: Chapman and Hall; 2000.
2. Whitehead J: The design and analysis of sequential clinical trials Chichester: John Wiley; 1997.
3. Wang SK, Tsiatis AA: Approximately optimal one-parameter boundaries for group sequential trials. Biometrics 1987, 43:193-199.
4. Kim K, DeMets DL: Design and analysis of group sequential tests based on the type I error spending rate function. Biometrika 1987, 74:149-154.
5. DeMets DL, Lan KKG: Interim Analysis: The alpha spending function approach. Stat Med 1994, 13:1341-1352.
6. Pampallona S, Tsiatis AA: Group sequential designs for onesided and two-sided hypothesis testing with provision for early stopping in favor of the null hypothesis. J Stat Plann Inf 1994, 42:19-35.
7. Sebille V, Bellissant E: Comparison of the two-sided single triangular test to the double triangular test. Control Clin Trials 2001, 22:503-514.
8. Sebille V, Bellissant E: Comparison of four sequential methods allowing for early stopping of comparative clinical trials. Clin Sci 2000, 98:569-578.
9. Whitehead J, Todd S: The double triangular test in practice. Pharmaceut Statist 2004, 3:39-50.
10. Sebille V, Bellissant E: Sequential methods and group sequential designs for comparative clinical trials. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2003, 17:505-516.
11. Torgerson DJ, Campbell MK: Use of unequal randomisation to aid the economic efficiency of clinical trials. BMJ 2000, 321:759.
12. Torgerson DJ, Campbell MK: Unequal randomisation can improve economic efficiency of clinical trials. J Health Serv res Policy 1997, 2:81-85.
13. Avins AL: Can unequal be more fair? Ethics, subject allocation, and randomised clinical trials. J Med Ethics 1998, 24:401-408.
14. Edwards S, Braunholtz D: Can unequal be more fair? A response to Andrew Avins. J Med Ethics 2000, 26:179-182.
15. Sposto M, Krailo MD: Use of unequal allocation in survival trials. Stat Med 1987, 6:119-126.
16. Pocock SJ: Allocation of patients to treatment in clinical trials. Biometrics 1979, 35:183-197.
17. Brunier H, Whitehead J: PEST 3.0 Operating Manual Reading University; 1993.
18. Sebille V, Bellissant E: Letter to the Editor. Control Clin Trials 2002, 23:423-424.
19. Whitehead J: Letter to the Editor. Control Clin Trials 2002, 23:422-423.