SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Lindsay Mayberry

Publications and source records attributed to Lindsay Mayberry.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization

Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within optimally identified matched pairs based on covariates and a distance matrix. When participants enroll sequentially, Sequentially Matched Randomization (SMR) randomizes within matches found "on-the-fly" to meet a pre-specified matching threshold. However, pre-specifying the ideal threshold can be challenging and SMR yields less-optimal matches than MR. We extend SMR to allow multiple participants to be randomized simultaneously, to use a dynamic threshold, and to allow matches to break and rematch if a better match later enrolls (Sequential Rematched Randomization; SRR). In simplified settings and a real-world application, we assess whether these extensions improve covariate balance, estimator/study efficiency, and optimality of matches. We investigate whether adjusting for more covariates can be detrimental upon covariate balance and efficiency as is the case of traditional stratified randomization. As secondary objectives, we use the case study to assess how SMR schemes compare side-by-side with common and related CAR schemes and whether adjusting for covariates in the design can be as powerful as adjusting for covariates in a parametric model. We find each SMR extension, individually and collectively, to improve covariate balance, estimator efficiency, study power, and quality of matches. We provide a case-study where CAR schemes with randomization-based inference can be as and more powerful than Non-CAR schemes with parametric adjustment for covariates.

stat.ME

Sequential monitoring using the Second Generation P-Value with Type I error controlled by monitoring frequency

Many adaptive monitoring schemes adjust the required evidence toward a hypothesis to control Type I error. This shifts focus away from determining scientific relevance with an uncompromised degree of evidence. We propose sequentially monitoring the Second Generation P-Value (SGPV) on repeated intervals until establishing evidence for scientific relevance (SeqSGPV). SeqSGPV encompasses existing strategies to monitor Region of Practical Equivalence (ROPE) or Region of Equivalence (ROE) hypotheses. Hence, our focus is to formalize sequential SGPV monitoring; establish a novel set of scientific hypotheses, called PRISM, which is a ROE with a ROPE surrounding the null hypothesis; and use monitoring frequency and a novel affirmation step to control Type I error. Under immediate and delayed outcomes, we assess finite and limiting SeqSGPV operating characteristics when monitoring PRISM, ROPE, and null-bound ROE hypotheses. In extensive simulations, SeqSGPV PRISM monitoring reduced wait time for fully sequential monitoring, average sample size, and reversals of null hypothesis conclusions under the null. With real-world data, we design a SeqSGPV-monitored randomized trial. SeqSGPV is method-agnostic and easy to implement. Adjusting monitoring frequency/affirmation and monitoring a one-sided PRISM synergistically control Type I error. PRISM monitoring and adjusting monitoring frequency to control Type I error may have application beyond SeqSGPV.

stat.ME