跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要围绕随机治疗比较、治疗效应异质性及获益人群选择展开。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Lihui Zhao
Lu Tian
Tianxi Cai
Brian Claggett
L. J. Wei

为未来比较研究有效选择目标人群

研究问题
如何利用已有的相似治疗比较研究,按基线特征筛选预期获益达到指定水平的人群,以支持未来试验的目标人群选择?
方法与思路
作者先构建参数化个体治疗差异评分,再校准不同评分阈值对应的治疗差异曲线,并通过交叉训练评估减少过度乐观偏差。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称方法支持获益阈值人群识别与候选评分模型选择;对单个预设工作模型,还提出平均治疗差异的推断程序。
阅读关注点
应核对评分与阈值曲线的校准方式、交叉训练评估的实施,以及现有研究的获益结论向未来目标人群迁移所需条件。
阅读边界
材料为版本未注明的 OpenAlex 索引摘要;未说明跨研究适用条件或推断细节,不能据此保证未来试验成功或个体治疗获益。

原文摘要

When comparing a new treatment with a control in a randomized clinical study, the treatment effect is generally assessed by evaluating a summary measure over a specific study population. The success of the trial heavily depends on the choice of such a population. In this paper, we show a systematic, effective way to identify a promising population, for which the new treatment is expected to have a desired benefit, utilizing the data from a current study involving similar comparator treatments. Specifically, using the existing data, we first create a parametric scoring system as a function of multiple multiple baseline covariates to estimate subject-specific treatment differences. Based on this scoring system, we specify a desired level of treatment difference and obtain a subgroup of patients, defined as those whose estimated scores exceed this threshold. An empirically calibrated threshold-specific treatment difference curve across a range of score values is constructed. The subpopulation of patients satisfying any given level of treatment benefit can then be identified accordingly. To avoid bias due to overoptimism, we utilize a cross-training-evaluation method for implementing the above two-step procedure. We then show how to select the best scoring system among all competing models. Furthermore, for cases in which only a single pre-specified working model is involved, inference procedures are proposed for the average treatment difference over a range of score values using the entire data set, and are justified theoretically and numerically. Lastly, the proposals are illustrated with the data from two clinical trials in treating HIV and cardiovascular diseases. Note that if we are not interested in designing a new study for comparing similar treatments, the new procedure can also be quite useful for the management of future patients, so that treatment may be targeted towards those who would receive nontrivial benefits to compensate for the risk or cost of the new treatment.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文