Characterization of the likelihood continual reassessment method
似然连续再评估法的刻画AI 解读 ↓
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。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究临床剂量探索的试验设计,未说明因果效应估计、离散选择行为或其他所列经济计量方向。
反馈分类问题似然连续再评估法的刻画AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
This paper deals with the design of the likelihood continual reassessment method, which is an increasingly widely used model-based method for dose-finding studies. It is common to implement the method in a two-stage approach, whereby the model-based stage is activated after an initial sequence of patients has been treated. While this two-stage approach is practically appealing, it lacks a theoretical framework, and it is often unclear how the design components should be specified. This paper develops a general framework based on the coherence principle, from which we derive a design calibration process. A real clinical-trial example is used to demonstrate that the proposed process can be implemented in a timely and reproducible manner, while offering competitive operating characteristics. We explore the operating characteristics of different models within this framework and show the performance to be insensitive to the choice of dose-toxicity model.