临床试验中的行为及其对乳腺x线照相术指南的影响

Amanda E. Kowalski
{"title":"临床试验中的行为及其对乳腺x线照相术指南的影响","authors":"Amanda E. Kowalski","doi":"10.3386/W25049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I unite the economics and medical literatures by examining behavior within a clinical trial to inform treatment guidelines. I use data from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study, an influential clinical trial on mammography. During the active study period of the trial, a substantial fraction of women in the control group received mammograms, and some women in the intervention group did not. Using this mammography behavior, random assignment within the trial, and a standard model from the economics literature, I divide participants into three groups that differ in how likely they are to receive mammograms. Making comparisons across these groups, I find two important relationships. First, I find heterogeneous selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are healthier. I find this relationship using a marginal treatment effect model that assumes no more than the local average treatment effect assumptions. Second, I find treatment effect heterogeneity along the margin of selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are more likely to experience harm from them. I find this relationship using an ancillary assumption that builds on the first empirical relationship. I find additional empirical support for the ancillary assumption using baseline covariates. My findings contribute to the literature concerned about harms from mammography by demonstrating variation across the margin of selection into mammography. This variation is problematic for current mammography guidelines for women in their 40s because it implies that they unintentionally encourage mammography for healthier women who are more likely to experience harm from them.","PeriodicalId":18934,"journal":{"name":"National Bureau of Economic Research","volume":"132 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Behavior within a Clinical Trial and Implications for Mammography Guidelines\",\"authors\":\"Amanda E. Kowalski\",\"doi\":\"10.3386/W25049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I unite the economics and medical literatures by examining behavior within a clinical trial to inform treatment guidelines. I use data from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study, an influential clinical trial on mammography. During the active study period of the trial, a substantial fraction of women in the control group received mammograms, and some women in the intervention group did not. Using this mammography behavior, random assignment within the trial, and a standard model from the economics literature, I divide participants into three groups that differ in how likely they are to receive mammograms. Making comparisons across these groups, I find two important relationships. First, I find heterogeneous selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are healthier. I find this relationship using a marginal treatment effect model that assumes no more than the local average treatment effect assumptions. Second, I find treatment effect heterogeneity along the margin of selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are more likely to experience harm from them. I find this relationship using an ancillary assumption that builds on the first empirical relationship. I find additional empirical support for the ancillary assumption using baseline covariates. My findings contribute to the literature concerned about harms from mammography by demonstrating variation across the margin of selection into mammography. This variation is problematic for current mammography guidelines for women in their 40s because it implies that they unintentionally encourage mammography for healthier women who are more likely to experience harm from them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"National Bureau of Economic Research\",\"volume\":\"132 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"National Bureau of Economic Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3386/W25049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Bureau of Economic Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3386/W25049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

我通过在临床试验中检查行为来结合经济学和医学文献,为治疗指南提供信息。我使用的数据来自加拿大国家乳房筛查研究,这是一项有影响力的乳房x光检查临床试验。在试验的积极研究期间,对照组中有相当一部分女性接受了乳房x光检查,而干预组中的一些女性没有接受。使用这种乳房x光检查行为,试验中的随机分配,以及经济学文献中的标准模型,我将参与者分为三组,他们接受乳房x光检查的可能性不同。通过对这些群体的比较,我发现了两个重要的关系。首先,我发现乳房x光检查的异质性选择:更有可能接受乳房x光检查的女性更健康。我使用边际治疗效果模型发现了这种关系,该模型假设不超过局部平均治疗效果假设。其次,我发现在选择乳房x光检查的边缘,治疗效果存在异质性:接受乳房x光检查的女性更有可能受到伤害。我使用建立在第一种经验关系基础上的辅助假设来发现这种关系。我发现额外的经验支持辅助假设使用基线协变量。我的发现通过证明乳房x光检查的选择范围的差异,为关注乳房x光检查危害的文献做出了贡献。对于目前针对40多岁女性的乳房x光检查指南来说,这种差异是有问题的,因为这意味着它们无意中鼓励更健康的女性接受乳房x光检查,而这些女性更有可能受到伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Behavior within a Clinical Trial and Implications for Mammography Guidelines
I unite the economics and medical literatures by examining behavior within a clinical trial to inform treatment guidelines. I use data from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study, an influential clinical trial on mammography. During the active study period of the trial, a substantial fraction of women in the control group received mammograms, and some women in the intervention group did not. Using this mammography behavior, random assignment within the trial, and a standard model from the economics literature, I divide participants into three groups that differ in how likely they are to receive mammograms. Making comparisons across these groups, I find two important relationships. First, I find heterogeneous selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are healthier. I find this relationship using a marginal treatment effect model that assumes no more than the local average treatment effect assumptions. Second, I find treatment effect heterogeneity along the margin of selection into mammography: women more likely to receive mammograms are more likely to experience harm from them. I find this relationship using an ancillary assumption that builds on the first empirical relationship. I find additional empirical support for the ancillary assumption using baseline covariates. My findings contribute to the literature concerned about harms from mammography by demonstrating variation across the margin of selection into mammography. This variation is problematic for current mammography guidelines for women in their 40s because it implies that they unintentionally encourage mammography for healthier women who are more likely to experience harm from them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Maximum Employment and the Participation Cycle Gay Politics Goes Mainstream: Democrats, Republicans, and Same-Sex Relationships Welfare and Output with Income Effects and Taste Shocks Which Markets (Don't) Drive Pharmaceutical Innovation? Evidence From U.S. Medicaid Expansions School Reopenings, Mobility, and COVID-19 Spread: Evidence from Texas
×
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