2011
DOI: 10.1002/sim.4395
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A hybrid procedure for detecting global treatment effects in multivariate clinical trials: theory and applications to fMRI studies

Abstract: In multivariate clinical trials, a key research endpoint is ascertaining whether a candidate treatment is more efficacious than an established alternative. This global endpoint is clearly of high practical value for studies, such as those arising from neuroimaging, where the outcome dimensions are not only numerous but they are also highly correlated and the available sample sizes are typically small. In this paper, we develop a two-stage procedure testing the null hypothesis of global equivalence between trea… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Alternatively, one can use Bayesian methods by setting a prior on the weights, and updating the weights with additional data. Minas et al () use a type of Bayesian method to estimate weights in the case of multivariate normal data, basing the priors on previous studies, and computing the posterior with a subset of pilot data taken from the main study data. Something similar to the above procedure can potentially fit within a group‐sequential design framework as well.…”
Section: Weightsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively, one can use Bayesian methods by setting a prior on the weights, and updating the weights with additional data. Minas et al () use a type of Bayesian method to estimate weights in the case of multivariate normal data, basing the priors on previous studies, and computing the posterior with a subset of pilot data taken from the main study data. Something similar to the above procedure can potentially fit within a group‐sequential design framework as well.…”
Section: Weightsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We consider both single stage and sequential J -stage designs for all these tests. Finally, the two-step, single-stage linear combination z + and t + tests proposed in Minas et al (2012) are also considered. Note that the latter tests can be derived as special cases of the z * and t *-tests for J = 2, (α 1,1 , α 0,1 ) = (0, 1) and C ( p 2 ) = p 2 .…”
Section: Empirical Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, it might be useful to emphasize that for fixed design parameters, the power of the linear combination test with weighting vector (either fixed or initial) set equal to the optimal weighting vector ω * attains the maximum power and provides an upper bound to all the other presented procedures, including Hotelling's T 2 -test as proved in Minas et al (2012) (Corollary 1). Compared to the z -tests with fixed weighting vectors w , as we can see in Figure 3, the adaptive z * lose some power for w̃ (= w̃ z 1 ) close to optimal but gains substantial amounts of power for ω̃ far from optimal, importantly avoiding the problem of z -tests having zero power for w̃ orthogonal to optimal.…”
Section: Empirical Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations