SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Clinical Trials
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Willan, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kowgier, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Willan, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kowgier, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Determining optimal sample sizes for multi-stage randomized clinical trials using value of information methods

Andrew Willan

Program in Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute and Department of Public Health Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, andy{at}andywillan.com

Matthew Kowgier

Department of Public Health Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Background Traditional sample size calculations for randomized clinical trials depend on somewhat arbitrarily chosen factors, such as Type I and II errors. An effectiveness trial (otherwise known as a pragmatic trial or management trial) is essentially an effort to inform decision-making, i.e., should treatment be adopted over standard? Taking a societal perspective and using Bayesian decision theory, Willan and Pinto (Stat. Med. 2005; 24:1791-1806 and Stat. Med. 2006; 25:720) show how to determine the sample size that maximizes the expected net gain, i.e., the difference between the cost of doing the trial and the value of the information gained from the results.

Methods These methods are extended to include multi-stage adaptive designs, with a solution given for a two-stage design. The methods are applied to two examples.

Results As demonstrated by the two examples, substantial increases in the expected net gain (ENG) can be realized by using multi-stage adaptive designs based on expected value of information methods. In addition, the expected sample size and total cost may be reduced.

Limitations Exact solutions have been provided for the two-stage design. Solutions for higher-order designs may prove to be prohibitively complex and approximate solutions may be required.

Conclusions The use of multi-stage adaptive designs for randomized clinical trials based on expected value of sample information methods leads to substantial gains in the ENG and reductions in the expected sample size and total cost. Clinical Trials 2008; 5: 289-300. http://ctj.sagepub.com

Clinical Trials, Vol. 5, No. 4, 289-300 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1740774508093981


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement