Compound optimal allocation for individual and collective ethics in binary clinical trials

Biometrika

Volumn 97, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 935-946

  Antognini, Alessandro Baldi ^a   Giovagnoli, Alessandra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Admissibility; Balance; Neyman's allocation; Optimality; Standardized compound criterion

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651298882     PISSN: 00063444     EISSN: 14643510     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asq055     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. BALDI ANTOGNINI, A. & GIOVAGNOLI, A. (2005). On the large sample optimality of sequential designs for comparing two or more treatments. Seq. Anal. 24, 205-17.
2. BALDI ANTOGNINI, A. & ZAGORAIOU, M. (2010). Covariate adjusted designs for combining efficiency, ethics and randomness in normal response trials. In mODa 9-Advances in Model-Oriented Design and Analysis, A. C. Atkinson, A. Giovagnoli & B. Torsney, C. May (eds). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
3. BANDYOPADHYAY, U., BISWAS, A. & BHATTACHARYA, R. (2007). A covariate adjusted two-stage allocation design for binary responses in randomized clinical trials. Statist. Med. 26, 4386-99.
4. BIEDERMANN, S., DETTE, H. & ZHU, W. (2007). Compound optimal designs for percentile estimation in dose-reponse models with restricted design intervals. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. 137, 3838-47.
5. CLYDE, M. & CHALONER, K. (1996). The equivalence of constrained and weighted designs in multiple objective design problems. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 91, 1236-44.
6. COOK, D. & WONG, W. (1994). On the equivalence of constrained and compound optimal designs. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 89, 687-92.
7. DETTE, H. (1997). Designing experiments with respect to standardized optimality criteria. J. R. Statist. Soc. B 59, 97-110.
8. DURHAM, S. D., FLOURNOY, N. & LI, W. (1998). Sequential designs for maximizing the probability of a favorable response. Can. J. Statist. 3, 479-95.
9. GERALDES, M., MELFI, V., PAGE, C. & ZHANG, H. (2006). The doubly adaptive weighted difference design. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. 136, 1923-39.
10. HU, F. & ROSENBERGER, W. (2003). Optimality, variability, power: evaluating response-adaptive randomization procedures for treatment comparisons. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 98, 671-8.
11. HU, F. & ROSENBERGER, W. (2006). The Theory of Response-Adaptive Randomization in Clinical Trials. New York: Wiley & Sons.
12. HU, F., ROSENBERGER, W. & ZHANG, L. (2006). Asymptotically best response-adaptive randomization procedures. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. 136, 1911-22.
13. IVANOVA, A. (2003). A play-the-winner type urn model with reduced variability. Metrika 58, 1-13.
14. MAY, C. & FLOURNOY, N. (2009). Asymptotics in response-adaptive designs generated by a two-color, randomly reinforced urn. Ann. Statist. 37, 1058-78.
15. MULIERE, P., PAGANONI, A. & SECCHI, P. (2006). A randomly reinforced urn. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. 136, 1853-74.
16. PUKELSHEIM, F. (2006). Optimal Design of Experiments. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM Classics.
17. ROSENBERGER, W., STALLARD, N., IVANOVA, A., HARPER, C. & RICKS, M. (2001). Optimal adaptive designs for binary response trials. Biometrics 57, 909-13.
18. TYMOFYEYEV, Y., ROSENBERGER, W. & HU, F. (2007). Implementing optimal allocation in sequential binary response experiments. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 102, 224-34.
19. WEI, L. J. & DURHAM, S. (1978). The randomized play-the-winner rule in medical trials. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 73, 840-3.
20. ZELEN, M. (1969). Play-the-winner rule and the controlled clinical trials. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 64, 131-46.