切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华针灸电子杂志 ›› 2017, Vol. 06 ›› Issue (04) : 140 -142. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3240.2017.04.003

所属专题: 经典病例

论著

随机对照试验中简单随机和最小化病例分配方法不可预测性的对比研究
崔岩1,()   
  1. 1.300193 天津中医药大学中医药工程学院医学信息工程教研室
  • 收稿日期:2017-04-28 出版日期:2017-11-15
  • 通信作者: 崔岩
  • 基金资助:
    天津市卫生与计划委员会中医中西医结合科研课题(2015081)国家重点基础研究规划项目课题(2011CB505406)

Comparison of the unpredictability between the simple randomized allocation method and the minimized case method in randomized controlled trial

Yan Cui1,()   

  1. 1.School of Traditional Medicine Engineering,Tianjin Unviversity of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Tianjin 300193,China
  • Received:2017-04-28 Published:2017-11-15
  • Corresponding author: Yan Cui
引用本文:

崔岩. 随机对照试验中简单随机和最小化病例分配方法不可预测性的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华针灸电子杂志, 2017, 06(04): 140-142.

Yan Cui. Comparison of the unpredictability between the simple randomized allocation method and the minimized case method in randomized controlled trial[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Acupuncture and Moxibustion(Electronic Edition), 2017, 06(04): 140-142.

目的

比较病例分配方法中完全随机和最小化方法分配结果的不可预测性。

方法

采用340例数据的真实随机对照试验数据,使用两种分配方法分配后,分别使用Logistics回归、随机森林和线性核支持向量机对已分配病例建模并预测下个病例的分配结果。以正确预测比例对比两种方法的不可预测性。

结果

完全随机方法达到几乎完美的不可预测性,最小化方法有一定可预测性。

结论

对于随机对照试验,应在保证组间平衡的前提下,尽量减小分配偏倚因子。

Objective

To compare the unpredictability of the allocation results of a completely randomized method and the minimized method in case allocation methods.

Methods

The real randomized controlled trial data containing 340 cases were used and allocated with the above two allocation methods.Logistics regression,random forest and linear kernel support vector machine were applied respectively to predict the next case.The unpredictability of the two allocation methods was compared with the correct predictor ratio.

Results

The results of completely randomized method achieved almost perfect unpredictability,and the minimization method had some predictability.

Conclusion

For randomized controlled trials,the allocation bias factor should be minimized under the premise of ensuring a balance between groups.

表1 两种方法的病例分配结果(例)
表2 分类器预测准确比及组间t检验结果对比
1
White H.An introduction to the use of randomised control trials to evaluate development interventions[J].Journal of Development Effectiveness,2013,5(1):30-49.
2
Pocock SJ,Simon R.Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial[J].Biometrics,1975,31(1):103-115.
3
Mao J,Hou Y,Shang H,et al.Study on the evaluation of the clinical effects of traditional Chinese medicine in heart failure by complex intervention:protocol of SECETCM-HF[J].Trials,2009,10(1):122-122.
4
Cui Y,Bu H,Wang H,et al.MACT:A Manageable Minimization Allocation System[J].Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine,2014:645064.
5
张波,沈其君.Logistic回归模型中自变量相对重要性评价方法的研究进展[J].浙江预防医学,2012,2(9):17-19.
6
方匡南,吴见彬,朱建平,等.随机森林方法研究综述[J].统计与信息论坛,2011,3(3):32-38.
7
黄英辉,李立奇,罗万春.支持向量机在临床疾病诊断中的应用[J].数学的实践与认识,2008,4(23):101-103.
No related articles found!
阅读次数
全文


摘要