For a factorial trial of say 2 treatments, patients are allocated to 1 of 4 groups: Gp1 receives both treatments A and B; Gp2 receives only A; Gp3 receives only B; and Gp4 receives neither A nor B (the control) 3/7 cambridge.org/core/services/…
The underpinning assumption that allows the efficiency in a factorial trial is that the treatments under investigation have independent effects of one another or have different mechanisms of action (ie they do not interact) 4/7
There have been many trials that have managed significant efficiencies using a factorial design - allowing multiple treatments to be assessed simultaneously eg the UK BEAM trial which evaluated different trts for back pain in a 3x2 factorial design 5/7 bmj.com/content/329/74…
However, it is always important to check if any interaction has occurred in your factorial trial - if you don’t this can make analysis and interpretation less robust - see reviews of factorial trials below 6/7
To help promote better analysis and reporting of factorial trials, there is a CONSORT extension under development (the RAFT project). Please follow the @nottingham_CTU for updates 7/7 nctu.ac.uk/other-research…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Mostly we set up trials to test if a new treatment is better than another (ie we test for superiority) but in a #NonInferiority design we wish to test if a treatment is not unacceptably worse than a comparator. 2/8
The main reasons why we might look for non-inferiority is when an alternative treatment is say much cheaper, or has fewer side effects … but we would only wish to use it if the benefits of the standard treatment are not significantly compromised. 3/8 onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…
Having spent the last couple of weeks discussing composite & surrogate outcomes, I was reminded this week of the importance of thoughtful planning on the choice of outcomes in the first place 1/6 #MethodologyMonday
In particular I was reminded of the fundamental work of #Donabedian to conceptualise what is important to measure to assess quality of (and improvement in) health care. Although developed decades ago, it remains just as relevant today 2/6 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
When we seek to assess the impact of a new intervention on care, the Donabedian model suggests there are 3 elements that may be impacted - the #structure the #process and the #outcome of care 3/6
Last week I discussed composite endpoints and how while they can be useful, they can also be fraught with difficulty. The same descriptors could equally be applied to #SurrogateOutcomes in clinical trials 1/9 #MethodologyMonday
A #SurrogateOutcome is a substitute measure (eg blood pressure) that one might use to stand in for the real outcome of interest (eg stroke) when the real outcomes of interest may take a very long time to measure - to allow trials to be completed more quickly & efficiently 2/9
Surrogate outcomes can take many forms and may be histological, physiological, radiological etc … biomarkers that predict events 3/9
Choosing the right outcome is key to a clinical trial. Sometimes a #CompositeOutcome
- an outcome that combines more than one dimension into a single measure - is felt to be most appropriate. These can be useful but can be fraught with difficulty 1/8 #MethodologyMonday
One of the primary reasons for using a composite outcome is trial efficiency - you can get more events quickly compared to the individual components thus increasing precision and efficiency in sample size calculations 2/8 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
However, the validity of a composite relies on consistency of the individual components -see Montori et al 3/8
Given the complexity of delivering clinical trials, they are a fertile ground to gain from #interdisciplinary thinking. For example, the field of trial #recruitment has already gained enormously from insights from other disciplinary approaches 1/7 #MethodologyMonday
A recent paper highlighted the use of #StatedPreference methods in this space. It showed aspects of trial design can affect recruitment 2/7
#StatedPreference methods eg discrete choice experiments are more commonly used by health economists to value and quantify aspects of health care but can be used to determine preference priorities in any domain 3/7
It’s good to start a new year getting the basics right. It’s the same with methods; important not to slip into using common errors.The recent Xmas BMJ paper which showed the most common stats/methods errors is a great place to start 1/7 #MethodologyMonday
The BMJ stats editors highlighted the top 12 most common stats errors they come across. They are summarised in a neat infographic 2/7
All are important,but a couple particularly resonate. One is “dichotomania” (the term coined by Stephen Senn for this) where a perfectly good continuous measure eg blood pressure or weight is then arbitrarily dichotomised into two categories - good/bad; high/low etc 3/7