Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Comparison of adaptive design and group sequential design
Authors: ZHU MING
Keywords: adaptive design, group sequential design, randomized play-the-winner rule, Pocock test, O’Brien-Fleming test, treatment failures
Issue Date: 14-Sep-2004
Citation: ZHU MING (2004-09-14). Comparison of adaptive design and group sequential design. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Abstract: Both adaptive designs and group sequential designs are effective in reducing the number of treatment failures in a clinical trial. Adaptive designs accomplish this goal by randomizing, a higher proportion of patients to the more successful treatment. Group sequential designs, on the other hand, accomplish this through early stopping. So we can find the better treatment early and thus more patients can be allocated to the better treatments. In this thesis, for fixed sample size, we compare the expected number of treatment failures for three designs -- the randomized play-the-winner rule, Pocock test and O'Brien-Fleming test. Simulation results show that group sequential tests are generally more effective at reducing the expected number of treatment failures than the RPW rule. And finally we show that the expected number of treatment failures can be further reduced if group sequential design is combined with RPW rule to allocate patients.
Appears in Collections:Master's Theses (Open)

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
thesis2.pdf258.34 kBAdobe PDF



Page view(s)

checked on Dec 16, 2018


checked on Dec 16, 2018

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.