Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization

Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Chipman, Jonathan J, Mayberry, Lindsay, GreevyJr, Robert A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator Chipman, Jonathan J
Mayberry, Lindsay
GreevyJr, Robert A
description Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within optimally identified matched pairs based on covariates and a distance matrix. When participants enroll sequentially, Sequentially Matched Randomization (SMR) randomizes within matches found "on-the-fly" to meet a pre-specified matching threshold. However, pre-specifying the ideal threshold can be challenging and SMR yields less-optimal matches than MR. We extend SMR to allow multiple participants to be randomized simultaneously, to use a dynamic threshold, and to allow matches to break and rematch if a better match later enrolls (Sequential Rematched Randomization; SRR). In simplified settings and a real-world application, we assess whether these extensions improve covariate balance, estimator/study efficiency, and optimality of matches. We investigate whether adjusting for more covariates can be detrimental upon covariate balance and efficiency as is the case of traditional stratified randomization. As secondary objectives, we use the case study to assess how SMR schemes compare side-by-side with common and related CAR schemes and whether adjusting for covariates in the design can be as powerful as adjusting for covariates in a parametric model. We find each SMR extension, individually and collectively, to improve covariate balance, estimator efficiency, study power, and quality of matches. We provide a case-study where CAR schemes with randomization-based inference can be as and more powerful than Non-CAR schemes with parametric adjustment for covariates.
doi_str_mv 10.48550/arxiv.2203.13797
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>arxiv_GOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_arxiv_primary_2203_13797</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2203_13797</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a677-6a7c63d7a32bdcbcf57a2703626953b19844b017707ce75fcaa349288273c8d33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdj8tOwzAURL1hgVo-gBX-AQfHN851ukMVL6lSJdR9dGM7rVEe4LgV5euBwIrVaDRHIx3GrnOZFUZreUvxI5wypSRkOWCFl2z_4ntK9hCGPR8HkQ5etN15xSf_fvRDCtTxefeORxrc2IdPSmEc-HfhxC1Nnrdj5HY8UQyUvCD3epzSf37JLlrqJn_1lwu2e7jfrZ_EZvv4vL7bCCoRRUloS3BIoBpnG9tqJIUSSlVWGpq8MkXRyBxRovWoW0sERaWMUQjWOIAFu_m9nU3rtxh6iuf6x7iejeEL-9xScQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization</title><source>arXiv.org</source><creator>Chipman, Jonathan J ; Mayberry, Lindsay ; GreevyJr, Robert A</creator><creatorcontrib>Chipman, Jonathan J ; Mayberry, Lindsay ; GreevyJr, Robert A</creatorcontrib><description>Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within optimally identified matched pairs based on covariates and a distance matrix. When participants enroll sequentially, Sequentially Matched Randomization (SMR) randomizes within matches found "on-the-fly" to meet a pre-specified matching threshold. However, pre-specifying the ideal threshold can be challenging and SMR yields less-optimal matches than MR. We extend SMR to allow multiple participants to be randomized simultaneously, to use a dynamic threshold, and to allow matches to break and rematch if a better match later enrolls (Sequential Rematched Randomization; SRR). In simplified settings and a real-world application, we assess whether these extensions improve covariate balance, estimator/study efficiency, and optimality of matches. We investigate whether adjusting for more covariates can be detrimental upon covariate balance and efficiency as is the case of traditional stratified randomization. As secondary objectives, we use the case study to assess how SMR schemes compare side-by-side with common and related CAR schemes and whether adjusting for covariates in the design can be as powerful as adjusting for covariates in a parametric model. We find each SMR extension, individually and collectively, to improve covariate balance, estimator efficiency, study power, and quality of matches. We provide a case-study where CAR schemes with randomization-based inference can be as and more powerful than Non-CAR schemes with parametric adjustment for covariates.</description><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2203.13797</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Statistics - Methodology</subject><creationdate>2022-03</creationdate><rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>228,230,776,881</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13797$$EView_record_in_Cornell_University$$FView_record_in_$$GCornell_University$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.13797$$DView paper in arXiv$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chipman, Jonathan J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mayberry, Lindsay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GreevyJr, Robert A</creatorcontrib><title>Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization</title><description>Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within optimally identified matched pairs based on covariates and a distance matrix. When participants enroll sequentially, Sequentially Matched Randomization (SMR) randomizes within matches found "on-the-fly" to meet a pre-specified matching threshold. However, pre-specifying the ideal threshold can be challenging and SMR yields less-optimal matches than MR. We extend SMR to allow multiple participants to be randomized simultaneously, to use a dynamic threshold, and to allow matches to break and rematch if a better match later enrolls (Sequential Rematched Randomization; SRR). In simplified settings and a real-world application, we assess whether these extensions improve covariate balance, estimator/study efficiency, and optimality of matches. We investigate whether adjusting for more covariates can be detrimental upon covariate balance and efficiency as is the case of traditional stratified randomization. As secondary objectives, we use the case study to assess how SMR schemes compare side-by-side with common and related CAR schemes and whether adjusting for covariates in the design can be as powerful as adjusting for covariates in a parametric model. We find each SMR extension, individually and collectively, to improve covariate balance, estimator efficiency, study power, and quality of matches. We provide a case-study where CAR schemes with randomization-based inference can be as and more powerful than Non-CAR schemes with parametric adjustment for covariates.</description><subject>Statistics - Methodology</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GOX</sourceid><recordid>eNpdj8tOwzAURL1hgVo-gBX-AQfHN851ukMVL6lSJdR9dGM7rVEe4LgV5euBwIrVaDRHIx3GrnOZFUZreUvxI5wypSRkOWCFl2z_4ntK9hCGPR8HkQ5etN15xSf_fvRDCtTxefeORxrc2IdPSmEc-HfhxC1Nnrdj5HY8UQyUvCD3epzSf37JLlrqJn_1lwu2e7jfrZ_EZvv4vL7bCCoRRUloS3BIoBpnG9tqJIUSSlVWGpq8MkXRyBxRovWoW0sERaWMUQjWOIAFu_m9nU3rtxh6iuf6x7iejeEL-9xScQ</recordid><startdate>20220325</startdate><enddate>20220325</enddate><creator>Chipman, Jonathan J</creator><creator>Mayberry, Lindsay</creator><creator>GreevyJr, Robert A</creator><scope>EPD</scope><scope>GOX</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220325</creationdate><title>Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization</title><author>Chipman, Jonathan J ; Mayberry, Lindsay ; GreevyJr, Robert A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a677-6a7c63d7a32bdcbcf57a2703626953b19844b017707ce75fcaa349288273c8d33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Statistics - Methodology</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chipman, Jonathan J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mayberry, Lindsay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GreevyJr, Robert A</creatorcontrib><collection>arXiv Statistics</collection><collection>arXiv.org</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chipman, Jonathan J</au><au>Mayberry, Lindsay</au><au>GreevyJr, Robert A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization</atitle><date>2022-03-25</date><risdate>2022</risdate><abstract>Covariate-adjusted randomization (CAR) can reduce the risk of covariate imbalance and, when accounted for in analysis, increase the power of a trial. Despite CAR advances, stratified randomization remains the most common CAR method. Matched Randomization (MR) randomizes treatment assignment within optimally identified matched pairs based on covariates and a distance matrix. When participants enroll sequentially, Sequentially Matched Randomization (SMR) randomizes within matches found "on-the-fly" to meet a pre-specified matching threshold. However, pre-specifying the ideal threshold can be challenging and SMR yields less-optimal matches than MR. We extend SMR to allow multiple participants to be randomized simultaneously, to use a dynamic threshold, and to allow matches to break and rematch if a better match later enrolls (Sequential Rematched Randomization; SRR). In simplified settings and a real-world application, we assess whether these extensions improve covariate balance, estimator/study efficiency, and optimality of matches. We investigate whether adjusting for more covariates can be detrimental upon covariate balance and efficiency as is the case of traditional stratified randomization. As secondary objectives, we use the case study to assess how SMR schemes compare side-by-side with common and related CAR schemes and whether adjusting for covariates in the design can be as powerful as adjusting for covariates in a parametric model. We find each SMR extension, individually and collectively, to improve covariate balance, estimator efficiency, study power, and quality of matches. We provide a case-study where CAR schemes with randomization-based inference can be as and more powerful than Non-CAR schemes with parametric adjustment for covariates.</abstract><doi>10.48550/arxiv.2203.13797</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2203.13797
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_arxiv_primary_2203_13797
source arXiv.org
subjects Statistics - Methodology
title Rematching on-the-fly: sequential matched randomization and a case for covariate-adjusted randomization
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T23%3A23%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-arxiv_GOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rematching%20on-the-fly:%20sequential%20matched%20randomization%20and%20a%20case%20for%20covariate-adjusted%20randomization&rft.au=Chipman,%20Jonathan%20J&rft.date=2022-03-25&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.2203.13797&rft_dat=%3Carxiv_GOX%3E2203_13797%3C/arxiv_GOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true