Volume 35, Issue 25 pp. 4528-4545
Research Article

Adaptive pre-specification in randomized trials with and without pair-matching

Laura B. Balzer

Corresponding Author

Laura B. Balzer

Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, 02115 MA, U.S.A.

Correspondence to: Laura Balzer, Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, U.S.A.

E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Mark J. van der Laan

Mark J. van der Laan

Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, 94110-7358 CA, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
Maya L. Petersen

Maya L. Petersen

Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, 94110-7358 CA, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
the SEARCH Collaboration

the SEARCH Collaboration

Division of HIV, Infectious Diseases and Global Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 94143-0874 CA, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 19 July 2016
Citations: 40

Abstract

In randomized trials, adjustment for measured covariates during the analysis can reduce variance and increase power. To avoid misleading inference, the analysis plan must be pre-specified. However, it is often unclear a priori which baseline covariates (if any) should be adjusted for in the analysis. Consider, for example, the Sustainable East Africa Research in Community Health (SEARCH) trial for HIV prevention and treatment. There are 16 matched pairs of communities and many potential adjustment variables, including region, HIV prevalence, male circumcision coverage, and measures of community-level viral load. In this paper, we propose a rigorous procedure to data-adaptively select the adjustment set, which maximizes the efficiency of the analysis. Specifically, we use cross-validation to select from a pre-specified library the candidate targeted maximum likelihood estimator (TMLE) that minimizes the estimated variance. For further gains in precision, we also propose a collaborative procedure for estimating the known exposure mechanism. Our small sample simulations demonstrate the promise of the methodology to maximize study power, while maintaining nominal confidence interval coverage. We show how our procedure can be tailored to the scientific question (intervention effect for the study sample vs. for the target population) and study design (pair-matched or not). Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.