Search

Many individually randomized group treatment (IRGT) trials randomly assign individuals to study arms but deliver treatments via shared agents, such as therapists, surgeons, or trainers. Post-randomization interactions induce correlations in outcome measures between participants sharing the same agent. Agents can be nested in or crossed with trial arm, and participants may interact with a single agent or with multiple agents. These complications have led to ambiguity in choice of models but there have been no systematic efforts to identify appropriate analytic models for these study designs. To address this gap, we undertook a simulation study to examine the performance of candidate analytic models in the presence of complex clustering arising from multiple membership, single membership, and single agent settings, in both nested and crossed designs and for a continuous outcome. With nested designs, substantial type I error rate inflation was observed when analytic models did not account for multiple membership and when analytic model weights characterizing the association with multiple agents did not match the data generating mechanism. Conversely, analytic models for crossed designs generally maintained nominal type I error rates unless there was notable imbalance in the number of participants that interact with each agent., (© 2024 The Author(s). Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) are commonly used to analyze clustered data, but when the number of clusters is small to moderate, standard statistical tests may produce elevated type I error rates. Small-sample corrections have been proposed for continuous or binary outcomes without covariate adjustment. However, appropriate tests to use for count outcomes or under covariate-adjusted models remains unknown. An important setting in which this issue arises is in cluster-randomized trials (CRTs). Because many CRTs have just a few clusters (eg, clinics or health systems), covariate adjustment is particularly critical to address potential chance imbalance and/or low power (eg, adjustment following stratified randomization or for the baseline value of the outcome). We conducted simulations to evaluate GLMM-based tests of the treatment effect that account for the small (10) or moderate (20) number of clusters under a parallel-group CRT setting across scenarios of covariate adjustment (including adjustment for one or more person-level or cluster-level covariates) for both binary and count outcomes. We find that when the intraclass correlation is non-negligible ( ≥ $$ \ge $$ 0.01) and the number of covariates is small ( ≤ $$ \le $$ 2), likelihood ratio tests with a between-within denominator degree of freedom have type I error rates close to the nominal level. When the number of covariates is moderate ( ≥ $$ \ge $$ 5), across our simulation scenarios, the relative performance of the tests varied considerably and no method performed uniformly well. Therefore, we recommend adjusting for no more than a few covariates and using likelihood ratio tests with a between-within denominator degree of freedom., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

We consider the critical problem of pharmacosurveillance for adverse events once a drug or medical product is incorporated into routine clinical care. When making inference on comparative safety using large-scale electronic health records, we often encounter an extremely rare binary adverse outcome with a large number of potential confounders. In this context, it is challenging to offer flexible methods to adjust for high-dimensional confounders, whereas use of the propensity score (PS) can help address this challenge by providing both confounding control and dimension reduction. Among PS methods, regression adjustment using the PS as a covariate in an outcome model has been incompletely studied and potentially misused. Previous studies have suggested that simple linear adjustment may not provide sufficient control of confounding. Moreover, no formal representation of the statistical procedure and associated inference has been detailed. In this paper, we characterize a three-step procedure, which performs flexible regression adjustment of the estimated PS followed by standardization to estimate the causal effect in a select population. We also propose a simple variance estimation method for performing inference. Through a realistic simulation mimicking data from the Food and Drugs Administration's Sentinel Initiative comparing the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta blockers on incidence of angioedema, we show that flexible regression on the PS resulted in less bias without loss of efficiency, and can outperform other methods when the PS model is correctly specified. In addition, the direct variance estimation method is a computationally fast and reliable approach for inference., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Sequential methods are well established for randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and their use in observational settings has increased with the development of national vaccine and drug safety surveillance systems that monitor large healthcare databases. Observational safety monitoring requires that sequential testing methods be better equipped to incorporate confounder adjustment and accommodate rare adverse events. New methods designed specifically for observational surveillance include a group sequential likelihood ratio test that uses exposure matching and generalized estimating equations approach that involves regression adjustment. However, little is known about the statistical performance of these methods or how they compare to RCT methods in both observational and rare outcome settings. We conducted a simulation study to determine the type I error, power and time-to-surveillance-end of group sequential likelihood ratio test, generalized estimating equations and RCT methods that construct group sequential Lan-DeMets boundaries using data from a matched (group sequential Lan-DeMets-matching) or unmatched regression (group sequential Lan-DeMets-regression) setting. We also compared the methods using data from a multisite vaccine safety study. All methods had acceptable type I error, but regression methods were more powerful, faster at detecting true safety signals and less prone to implementation difficulties with rare events than exposure matching methods. Method performance also depended on the distribution of information and extent of confounding by site. Our results suggest that choice of sequential method, especially the confounder control strategy, is critical in rare event observational settings. These findings provide guidance for choosing methods in this context and, in particular, suggest caution when conducting exposure matching., (Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Although massage is one of the most popular complementary and alternative medical (CAM) treatments for anxiety, its effectiveness has never been rigorously evaluated for a diagnosed anxiety disorder. This study evaluates the effectiveness of therapeutic massage for persons with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)., Methods: Sixty-eight persons with GAD were randomized to therapeutic massage (n=23), thermotherapy (n=22), or relaxing room therapy (n=23) for a total of 10 sessions over 12 weeks. Mean reduction in anxiety was measured by the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS). Secondary outcomes included 50% reduction in HARS and symptom resolution of GAD, changes in depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)), worry and GAD-related disability. We compared changes in these outcomes in the massage and control groups posttreatment and at 6 months using generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression., Results: All groups had improved by the end of treatment (adjusted mean change scores for the HARS ranged from -10.0 to -13.0; P<.001) and maintained their gains at the 26-week followup. No differences were seen between groups (P=.39). Symptom reduction and resolution of GAD, depressive symptoms, worry and disability showed similar patterns., Conclusions: Massage was not superior to the control treatments, and all showed some clinically important improvements, likely due to some beneficial but generalized relaxation response. Because the relaxing room treatment is substantially less expensive than the other treatments, a similar treatment packaged in a clinically credible manner might be the most cost effective option for persons with GAD who want to try relaxation-oriented CAM therapies.