Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials: Equipoise-stratified randomization

Philip W. Lavori, A. John Rush, Stephen R. Wisniewski, Jonathan E. Alpert, Maurizio Fava, David J. Kupfer, Andrew Nierenberg, Frederic M. Quitkin, Harold A. Sackeim, Michael E. Thase, Madhukar Trivedi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

129 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As psychiatric practice patterns evolve to take advantage of the growing list of treatments with proven efficacy, research studies with broader aims will become increasingly important. Randomized trials may need to accommodate multiple treatment options. In completely randomized designs, patients are assigned at random to one of the options, requiring that patients and clinicians find each of the options acceptable. In "clinician's choice" designs, patients are randomized to a small number of broad strategies and the choice of specific option within the broad strategy is left up to the clinician. The clinician's choice design permits some scope to patient and clinician preferences, but sacrifices the ability to make randomization-based comparisons of specific options. We describe a new approach, which we call the "equipoise stratified" design, that merges the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the other two designs for clinical trials. The three designs are contrasted, using the National Institute of Mental Health Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial as an example.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)792-801
Number of pages10
JournalBiological Psychiatry
Volume50
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 15 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Random Allocation
Clinical Trials
National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.)
Patient Preference
Psychiatry
Therapeutics
Research
boldenone undecylenate

Keywords

  • Clinical trials
  • Design
  • Equipoise
  • Methodology
  • Statistics
  • Treatment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Lavori, P. W., Rush, A. J., Wisniewski, S. R., Alpert, J. E., Fava, M., Kupfer, D. J., ... Trivedi, M. (2001). Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials: Equipoise-stratified randomization. Biological Psychiatry, 50(10), 792-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01223-9

Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials : Equipoise-stratified randomization. / Lavori, Philip W.; Rush, A. John; Wisniewski, Stephen R.; Alpert, Jonathan E.; Fava, Maurizio; Kupfer, David J.; Nierenberg, Andrew; Quitkin, Frederic M.; Sackeim, Harold A.; Thase, Michael E.; Trivedi, Madhukar.

In: Biological Psychiatry, Vol. 50, No. 10, 15.11.2001, p. 792-801.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lavori, PW, Rush, AJ, Wisniewski, SR, Alpert, JE, Fava, M, Kupfer, DJ, Nierenberg, A, Quitkin, FM, Sackeim, HA, Thase, ME & Trivedi, M 2001, 'Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials: Equipoise-stratified randomization', Biological Psychiatry, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 792-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01223-9
Lavori, Philip W. ; Rush, A. John ; Wisniewski, Stephen R. ; Alpert, Jonathan E. ; Fava, Maurizio ; Kupfer, David J. ; Nierenberg, Andrew ; Quitkin, Frederic M. ; Sackeim, Harold A. ; Thase, Michael E. ; Trivedi, Madhukar. / Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials : Equipoise-stratified randomization. In: Biological Psychiatry. 2001 ; Vol. 50, No. 10. pp. 792-801.
@article{a30019ba287642919a86bcd8f5aaf86b,
title = "Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials: Equipoise-stratified randomization",
abstract = "As psychiatric practice patterns evolve to take advantage of the growing list of treatments with proven efficacy, research studies with broader aims will become increasingly important. Randomized trials may need to accommodate multiple treatment options. In completely randomized designs, patients are assigned at random to one of the options, requiring that patients and clinicians find each of the options acceptable. In {"}clinician's choice{"} designs, patients are randomized to a small number of broad strategies and the choice of specific option within the broad strategy is left up to the clinician. The clinician's choice design permits some scope to patient and clinician preferences, but sacrifices the ability to make randomization-based comparisons of specific options. We describe a new approach, which we call the {"}equipoise stratified{"} design, that merges the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the other two designs for clinical trials. The three designs are contrasted, using the National Institute of Mental Health Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial as an example.",
keywords = "Clinical trials, Design, Equipoise, Methodology, Statistics, Treatment",
author = "Lavori, {Philip W.} and Rush, {A. John} and Wisniewski, {Stephen R.} and Alpert, {Jonathan E.} and Maurizio Fava and Kupfer, {David J.} and Andrew Nierenberg and Quitkin, {Frederic M.} and Sackeim, {Harold A.} and Thase, {Michael E.} and Madhukar Trivedi",
year = "2001",
month = "11",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01223-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
pages = "792--801",
journal = "Biological Psychiatry",
issn = "0006-3223",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Strengthening clinical effectiveness trials

T2 - Equipoise-stratified randomization

AU - Lavori, Philip W.

AU - Rush, A. John

AU - Wisniewski, Stephen R.

AU - Alpert, Jonathan E.

AU - Fava, Maurizio

AU - Kupfer, David J.

AU - Nierenberg, Andrew

AU - Quitkin, Frederic M.

AU - Sackeim, Harold A.

AU - Thase, Michael E.

AU - Trivedi, Madhukar

PY - 2001/11/15

Y1 - 2001/11/15

N2 - As psychiatric practice patterns evolve to take advantage of the growing list of treatments with proven efficacy, research studies with broader aims will become increasingly important. Randomized trials may need to accommodate multiple treatment options. In completely randomized designs, patients are assigned at random to one of the options, requiring that patients and clinicians find each of the options acceptable. In "clinician's choice" designs, patients are randomized to a small number of broad strategies and the choice of specific option within the broad strategy is left up to the clinician. The clinician's choice design permits some scope to patient and clinician preferences, but sacrifices the ability to make randomization-based comparisons of specific options. We describe a new approach, which we call the "equipoise stratified" design, that merges the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the other two designs for clinical trials. The three designs are contrasted, using the National Institute of Mental Health Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial as an example.

AB - As psychiatric practice patterns evolve to take advantage of the growing list of treatments with proven efficacy, research studies with broader aims will become increasingly important. Randomized trials may need to accommodate multiple treatment options. In completely randomized designs, patients are assigned at random to one of the options, requiring that patients and clinicians find each of the options acceptable. In "clinician's choice" designs, patients are randomized to a small number of broad strategies and the choice of specific option within the broad strategy is left up to the clinician. The clinician's choice design permits some scope to patient and clinician preferences, but sacrifices the ability to make randomization-based comparisons of specific options. We describe a new approach, which we call the "equipoise stratified" design, that merges the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the other two designs for clinical trials. The three designs are contrasted, using the National Institute of Mental Health Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial as an example.

KW - Clinical trials

KW - Design

KW - Equipoise

KW - Methodology

KW - Statistics

KW - Treatment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035890924&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035890924&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01223-9

DO - 10.1016/S0006-3223(01)01223-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 11720698

AN - SCOPUS:0035890924

VL - 50

SP - 792

EP - 801

JO - Biological Psychiatry

JF - Biological Psychiatry

SN - 0006-3223

IS - 10

ER -