Patient enrollment in medical trials: Selection bias in a randomized experiment

Journal of Econometrics

Volumn 144, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 341-351

  Malani, Anup ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Experiment; Randomization bias; Selection; Treatment effect

Indexed keywords

ESTIMATION; EXPERIMENTS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PHOTOACOUSTIC EFFECT; POPULATION STATISTICS; SET THEORY;

ELSEVIER (CO); GENERAL POPULATION; MEDICAL TRIALS; SELECTION BIAS; TREATMENT EFFECTS;

PATIENT TREATMENT;

EID: 45849149618     PISSN: 03044076     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.04.002     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Britton A., McKee M., Black N., McPherson K., Sanderson C., and Bain C. Threats to applicability of randomised trials: Exclusions and selective participation. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 4 2 (1999) 112-121
2. Dunn L.B., and Gordon N.E. Improving informed consent and enhancing recruitment for research by understanding economic behavior. Journal of the American Medical Association 293 5 (2005) 609-612
3. Ellenberg J.H. Selection bias in observational and experimental studies. Statistics in Medicine 13 5-7 (1994) 557-567
4. For the Protection of Human Subjectsof Biomedical. T. N.C., Research, B., April 18, 1979. The belmont report
5. Grady C., Dickert N., Jawetz T., Gensler G., and Emanuel E. An analysis of u.s. practices of paying research subjects. Contemporary Clinical Trials 26 (2005) 365-375
6. Hadar J., and Russell W.R. Rules for ordering uncertain prospects. American Economic Review 59 1 (1969) 25-34
7. Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., Rutstrom, E.E., 2005. Risk attitudes, randomization to treatment, and self-sleection into experiments. Centre for Economic and Business Research Discussion Paper
8. Heckman J., and Honore B.E. The empirical content of the roy model. Econometrica 58 5 (1990) 1121-1149
9. Heckman J.J. Randomization and social policy evaluation. In: Manski C., and Garfinkel I. (Eds). Evaluating Welfare and Training Programs (1992), Harvard University Press 201-230
10. Heckman J.J. Randomization as an instrumental variable. Review of Economics and Statistics 78 2 (1996) 336-341
11. Heckman J.J., and Smith J.A. Assessing the case for social experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 2 (1995) 85-110
12. Hunter J.J. Independence, conditional expectation, and zero covariance. American Statistician 26 5 (1972) 22-24
13. Kamoinka, T., Lacroix, G., 2002. Assessing the extent of randomization bias in the canadian self-sufficiency experiment. Working paper
14. Lancaster H. Zero correlation and independence. Australian Journal of Statistics 1 3 (1959) 53-56
15. Leipnik R. When does zero correlation imply independence?. American Mathematical Monthly 68 6 (1961) 563-565
16. National Cancer Institute. 2006a. Informed consent template for cancer treatment trials
17. National Cancer Institute. 2006b. Simplification of informed consent documents
18. Olschewski M., Schumacher M., and Davis K.B. Analysis of randomized and nonrandomized patients in clinical trials using the comprehensive cohort follow-up study design. Controlled Clinical Trials 13 (1992) 226-239
19. Pfizer,, 2006. Policy on compensation to human research subjects
20. Philipson, T., 2000. External treatment effects and program implementation bias
21. Philipson T., and DeSimone J. Experiments and subject sampling. Biometrika 84 (1997) 221-234
22. Resier S.J. Research compensation and monetarization of medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association 293 5 (2005) 613-614
23. Robinson D., Woerner M.G., Pollack S., and Lerner G. Subject selection biases in clinical trials: Data from a multicenter schizophrenia treatment study. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 16 2 (1996) 170-176
24. Roy A. Some thoughts on the distribution of earnings. Oxford Economic Papers (New Series) 3 (1951) 135-146
25. Schouten H.J.A. Sample size formula with a continuous outcome for unequal group sizes and unequal variances. Statistics in Medicine 18 (1999) 87-91
26. Senore C., Battista R.N., Ponti A., Segnan N., Shapiro S.H., Rosso S., and Aimar D. Comparing participants and nonparticipants in a smoking cessation trial: Selection factors associated with general practitioner recruitment activity. Journal of Climincal Epidemiology 52 1 (1999) 83-89
27. University of North Carolina, Office of Clinical Trials, 2004. Developing good recruitment practices. Office of Clinical Trials Newsletter 2(4), 1, 3
28. Verheggen F.W., Nieman F., and Jonkers R. Determinants of patient participation in clinical studies requiring informed consent: Why patients enter a clinical trial. Patient Education and Counseling 35 2 (1998) 111-125
29. World Medical Association. 2000. Declaration of helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects