Adaptive Selection of the Optimal Strategy to Improve Precision and Power in Randomized Trials

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.17453v3
• Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2023 15:52:03 GMT
• Title: Adaptive Selection of the Optimal Strategy to Improve Precision and Power in Randomized Trials
• Authors: Laura B. Balzer, Erica Cai, Lucas Godoy Garraza, Pracheta Amaranath
• Abstract summary: We show how to select the adjustment approach -- which variables and in which form -- to maximize precision. Our approach maintains Type-I error control (under the null) and offers substantial gains in precision. When applied to real data, we also see meaningful efficiency improvements overall and within subgroups.
• Score: 2.048226951354646
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Benkeser et al. demonstrate how adjustment for baseline covariates in randomized trials can meaningfully improve precision for a variety of outcome types. Their findings build on a long history, starting in 1932 with R.A. Fisher and including more recent endorsements by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency. Here, we address an important practical consideration: *how* to select the adjustment approach -- which variables and in which form -- to maximize precision, while maintaining Type-I error control. Balzer et al. previously proposed *Adaptive Prespecification* within TMLE to flexibly and automatically select, from a prespecified set, the approach that maximizes empirical efficiency in small trials (N$<$40). To avoid overfitting with few randomized units, selection was previously limited to working generalized linear models, adjusting for a single covariate. Now, we tailor Adaptive Prespecification to trials with many randomized units. Using $V$-fold cross-validation and the estimated influence curve-squared as the loss function, we select from an expanded set of candidates, including modern machine learning methods adjusting for multiple covariates. As assessed in simulations exploring a variety of data generating processes, our approach maintains Type-I error control (under the null) and offers substantial gains in precision -- equivalent to 20-43\% reductions in sample size for the same statistical power. When applied to real data from ACTG Study 175, we also see meaningful efficiency improvements overall and within subgroups.

Related papers

• Improving Bias Correction Standards by Quantifying its Effects on Treatment Outcomes [54.18828236350544]
  Propensity score matching (PSM) addresses selection biases by selecting comparable populations for analysis. Different matching methods can produce significantly different Average Treatment Effects (ATE) for the same task, even when meeting all validation criteria. To address this issue, we introduce a novel metric, A2A, to reduce the number of valid matches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T12:42:24Z)
• Dual-stage optimizer for systematic overestimation adjustment applied to multi-objective genetic algorithms for biomarker selection [0.18648070031379424]
  Biomarker identification with feature selection methods can be addressed as a multi-objective problem with trade-offs between predictive ability and parsimony in the number of features. We propose DOSA-MO, a novel multi-objective optimization wrapper algorithm that learns how the original estimation, its variance, and the feature set size of the solutions predict the overestimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-27T16:13:14Z)
• Boosting Fair Classifier Generalization through Adaptive Priority Reweighing [59.801444556074394]
  A performance-promising fair algorithm with better generalizability is needed. This paper proposes a novel adaptive reweighing method to eliminate the impact of the distribution shifts between training and test data on model generalizability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-15T13:04:55Z)
• Bilevel Optimization for Feature Selection in the Data-Driven Newsvendor Problem [8.281391209717105]
  We study the feature-based news vendor problem, in which a decision-maker has access to historical data. In this setting, we investigate feature selection, aiming to derive sparse, explainable models with improved out-of-sample performance. We present a mixed integer linear program reformulation for the bilevel program, which can be solved to optimality with standard optimization solvers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-12T08:52:26Z)
• Flexible variable selection in the presence of missing data [0.0]
  We propose a non-parametric variable selection algorithm combined with multiple imputation to develop flexible panels in the presence of missing-at-random data. We show that our proposal has good operating characteristics and results in panels with higher classification and variable selection performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-25T21:41:03Z)
• A Lagrangian Duality Approach to Active Learning [119.36233726867992]
  We consider the batch active learning problem, where only a subset of the training data is labeled. We formulate the learning problem using constrained optimization, where each constraint bounds the performance of the model on labeled samples. We show, via numerical experiments, that our proposed approach performs similarly to or better than state-of-the-art active learning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-08T19:18:49Z)
• Variable selection with missing data in both covariates and outcomes: Imputation and machine learning [1.0333430439241666]
  The missing data issue is ubiquitous in health studies. Machine learning methods weaken parametric assumptions. XGBoost and BART have the overall best performance across various settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-06T20:18:29Z)
• Selecting Treatment Effects Models for Domain Adaptation Using Causal Knowledge [82.5462771088607]
  We propose a novel model selection metric specifically designed for ITE methods under the unsupervised domain adaptation setting. In particular, we propose selecting models whose predictions of interventions' effects satisfy known causal structures in the target domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-11T21:03:14Z)
• Increasing the efficiency of randomized trial estimates via linear adjustment for a prognostic score [59.75318183140857]
  Estimating causal effects from randomized experiments is central to clinical research. Most methods for historical borrowing achieve reductions in variance by sacrificing strict type-I error rate control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-17T21:10:10Z)
• Applying Dynamic Training-Subset Selection Methods Using Genetic Programming for Forecasting Implied Volatility [0.0]
  This paper aims to improve the accuracy of forecasting implied volatility using an extension of genetic programming (GP) Four dynamic training-subset selection methods are proposed based on random, sequential or adaptive subset selection. Results show that the dynamic approach improves the forecasting performance of the generated GP models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-29T21:28:30Z)
• Evaluating Prediction-Time Batch Normalization for Robustness under Covariate Shift [81.74795324629712]
  We call prediction-time batch normalization, which significantly improves model accuracy and calibration under covariate shift. We show that prediction-time batch normalization provides complementary benefits to existing state-of-the-art approaches for improving robustness. The method has mixed results when used alongside pre-training, and does not seem to perform as well under more natural types of dataset shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-19T05:08:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.