On controversial statistical issues in clinical research

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials Pub Date : 2015-05-02 DOI:10.2147/OAJCT.S63266
S. Chow, Fuyu Song
{"title":"On controversial statistical issues in clinical research","authors":"S. Chow, Fuyu Song","doi":"10.2147/OAJCT.S63266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In clinical development of a test treatment under investigation, clinical trials are often conducted for evaluation of safety and efficacy of the test treatment. To provide an accurate and reliable assessment, adequate and well-controlled clinical trials using valid study designs are necessarily conducted for obtaining substantial evidence of safety and efficacy of the test treat - ment under investigation. In practice, however, some debatable issues are commonly encountered regardless compliance with good statistics practice and good clinical practice. These issues include, but are not limited to: 1) appropriateness of statistical hypotheses for clinical investiga- tion; 2) correctness of power analysis assumptions; 3) integrity of randomization and blinding; 4) post hoc endpoint selection; 5) impact of protocol amendments on the characteristics of the trial population; 6) multiplicity in clinical trials; 7) missing data imputation; 8) adaptive design methods; and 9) independence of a data monitoring committee. In this article, these issues are briefly described. The impact of these issues on the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the test treatment under investigation are discussed with examples whenever applicable. Some recommendations regarding possible resolutions of these issues are also provided.","PeriodicalId":19500,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/OAJCT.S63266","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJCT.S63266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In clinical development of a test treatment under investigation, clinical trials are often conducted for evaluation of safety and efficacy of the test treatment. To provide an accurate and reliable assessment, adequate and well-controlled clinical trials using valid study designs are necessarily conducted for obtaining substantial evidence of safety and efficacy of the test treat - ment under investigation. In practice, however, some debatable issues are commonly encountered regardless compliance with good statistics practice and good clinical practice. These issues include, but are not limited to: 1) appropriateness of statistical hypotheses for clinical investiga- tion; 2) correctness of power analysis assumptions; 3) integrity of randomization and blinding; 4) post hoc endpoint selection; 5) impact of protocol amendments on the characteristics of the trial population; 6) multiplicity in clinical trials; 7) missing data imputation; 8) adaptive design methods; and 9) independence of a data monitoring committee. In this article, these issues are briefly described. The impact of these issues on the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the test treatment under investigation are discussed with examples whenever applicable. Some recommendations regarding possible resolutions of these issues are also provided.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于临床研究中有争议的统计问题
在正在研究的试验治疗的临床开发中,通常进行临床试验以评估试验治疗的安全性和有效性。为了提供准确和可靠的评估,必须进行充分和控制良好的临床试验,使用有效的研究设计,以获得研究中试验治疗的安全性和有效性的实质性证据。然而,在实践中,一些有争议的问题是经常遇到的,不管是否符合良好的统计实践和良好的临床实践。这些问题包括但不限于:1)临床研究统计假设的适宜性;2)功率分析假设的正确性;3)随机化和盲法的完整性;4)事后终点选择;5)方案修订对试验人群特征的影响;6)临床试验的多样性;7)缺失数据的输入;8)适应性设计方法;9)数据监控委员会的独立性。在本文中,将简要描述这些问题。这些问题对正在研究的试验治疗的安全性和有效性的评价的影响在适用的情况下用实例进行了讨论。还就这些问题的可能解决办法提出了一些建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a Newly Developed Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Group to Promote Healthy Aging Among Older People with HIV: Study Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Center with or Without a Coordinator? The Coordinator as an Integral Part of a Research Team A Multidomain Intervention Program for Older People with Dementia: A Pilot Study Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Insulin Fast Dissolving Films versus Control Group for Anosmic Patients for Improving Their Health and Social Qualities of Life Treatment of Oropharyngeal Symptoms: A Prospective, Single-Dose, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1