ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2014
Inference about the expected performance of a data-driven dynamic treatment regime.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deeply Tailored Adaptive Interventions to Reduce College Student Drinking: a Real-World Application of Q-Learning for SMART Studies.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022Trial
- Estimation and inference on high-dimensional individualized treatment rule in observational data using split-and-pooled de-correlated score.Journal of machine learning research : JMLR · 2022Article
- A SMART approach to optimizing delivery of an mHealth intervention among cancer survivors with posttraumatic stress symptoms.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Article
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Personalized Medicine With Software.Frontiers in big data · 2021Article
- Optimal individualized decision rules using instrumental variable methods.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2021Article
- Predictive approaches to heterogeneous treatment effects: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Precision Medicine.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2019Article
- Evaluating the impact of treating the optimal subgroup.Statistical methods in medical research · 2017Observational
- TARGETED SEQUENTIAL DESIGN FOR TARGETED LEARNING INFERENCE OF THE OPTIMAL TREATMENT RULE AND ITS MEAN REWARD.Annals of statistics · 2017Article
- Optimal Individualized Treatments in Resource-Limited Settings.The international journal of biostatistics · 2016Article
- Using pilot data to size a two-arm randomized trial to find a nearly optimal personalized treatment strategy.Statistics in medicine · 2016Article
- STATISTICAL INFERENCE FOR THE MEAN OUTCOME UNDER A POSSIBLY NON-UNIQUE OPTIMAL TREATMENT STRATEGY.Annals of statistics · 2016Article
- Comment.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2016Article
- Response to reader reaction.Biometrics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA dynamic treatment regime (DTR) comprises a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of intervention, that recommends how to individualize treatment to patients based on evolving treatment and covariate history. These regimes are useful for managing chronic disorders, and fit into the larger paradigm of personalized medicine. The Value of a DTR is the expected outcome when the DTR is used to assign treatments to a population of interest. PURPOSE: The Value of a data-driven DTR, estimated using data from a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial, is both a data-dependent parameter and a non-smooth function of the underlying generative distribution. These features introduce additional variability that is not accounted for by standard methods for conducting statistical inference, for example, the bootstrap or normal approximations, if applied without adjustment. Our purpose is to provide a feasible method for constructing valid confidence intervals (CIs) for this quantity of practical interest.
methodsWe propose a conceptually simple and computationally feasible method for constructing valid CIs for the Value of an estimated DTR based on subsampling. The method is self-tuning by virtue of an approach called the double bootstrap. We demonstrate the proposed method using a series of simulated experiments.
resultsThe proposed method offers considerable improvement in terms of coverage rates of the CIs over the standard bootstrap approach. LIMITATIONS: In this article, we have restricted our attention to Q-learning for estimating the optimal DTR. However, other methods can be employed for this purpose; to keep the discussion focused, we have not explored these alternatives.
conclusionSubsampling-based CIs provide much better performance compared to standard bootstrap for the Value of an estimated DTR.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.