ArticleStatistics in medicine2022
Bayesian set of best dynamic treatment regimes: Construction and sample size calculation for SMARTs with binary outcomes.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A non-parametric Bayesian approach for adjusting partial compliance in sequential decision making.Statistics in medicine · 2023Trial
- The Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial for Controlling Infectious Diseases: A Review of Recent Developments.American journal of public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials (SMARTs) compare sequences of treatment decision rules called dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs). In particular, the Adaptive Treatment for Alcohol and Cocaine Dependence (ENGAGE) SMART aimed to determine the best DTRs for patients with a substance use disorder. While many authors have focused on a single pairwise comparison, addressing the main goal involves comparisons of >2 DTRs. For complex comparisons, there is a paucity of methods for binary outcomes. We fill this gap by extending the multiple comparisons with the best (MCB) methodology to the Bayesian binary outcome setting. The set of best is constructed based on simultaneous credible intervals. A substantial challenge for power analysis is the correlation between outcome estimators for distinct DTRs embedded in SMARTs due to overlapping subjects. We address this using Robins' G-computation formula to take a weighted average of parameter draws obtained via simulation from the parameter posteriors. We use non-informative priors and work with the exact distribution of parameters avoiding unnecessary normality assumptions and specification of the correlation matrix of DTR outcome summary statistics. We conduct simulation studies for both the construction of a set of optimal DTRs using the Bayesian MCB procedure and the sample size calculation for two common SMART designs. We illustrate our method on the ENGAGE SMART. The R package SMARTbayesR for power calculations is freely available on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) repository. An RShiny app is available at https://wilart.shinyapps.io/shinysmartbayesr/.
Indexed as
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.