3.8 Article

Inference after covariate-adaptive randomisation: aspects of methodology and theory

期刊

STATISTICAL THEORY AND RELATED FIELDS
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 172-186

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/24754269.2021.1871873

关键词

balancedness of assignments; efficiency; model-assisted approach; model free inference; stratification; survival analysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. U.S. National Science Foundation
  3. [11831008]
  4. [DMS-1914411]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article reviews the methodology and theory developed in the last decade for statistical inference under covariate-adaptive randomisation, focusing on specific issues encountered in practical applications and providing recommendations and discussions.
Covariate-adaptive randomisation has a more than 45 years of history of applications in clinical trials, in order to balance treatment assignments across prognostic factors that may have influence on the outcomes of interest. However, almost no theory had been developed for covariate-adaptive randomisation until a paper on the theory of testing hypotheses published in 2010. In this article, we review aspects of methodology and theory developed in the last decade for statistical inference under covariate-adaptive randomisation. We focus on issues such as whether a conventional procedure valid under the assumption that treatments are assigned completely at random is still valid or conservative when the actual randomisation is covariate-adaptive, how a valid inference procedure can be obtained by modifying a conventional method or directly constructed by stratifying the covariates used in randomisation, whether inference procedures have different properties when covariate-adaptive randomisation schemes have different degrees of balancing assignments, and how to further adjust covariates in the inference procedures to gain more efficiency. Recommendations are made during the review and further research problems are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据