↓ Skip to main content

Testing for carryover effects after cessation of treatments: a design approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing for carryover effects after cessation of treatments: a design approach
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12874-016-0191-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Gwynn Sturdevant, Thomas Lumley

Abstract

Recently, trials addressing noisy measurements with diagnosis occurring by exceeding thresholds (such as diabetes and hypertension) have been published which attempt to measure carryover - the impact that treatment has on an outcome after cessation. The design of these trials has been criticised and simulations have been conducted which suggest that the parallel-designs used are not adequate to test this hypothesis; two solutions are that either a differing parallel-design or a cross-over design could allow for diagnosis of carryover. We undertook a systematic simulation study to determine the ability of a cross-over or a parallel-group trial design to detect carryover effects on incident hypertension in a population with prehypertension. We simulated blood pressure and focused on varying criteria to diagnose systolic hypertension. Using the difference in cumulative incidence hypertension to analyse parallel-group or cross-over trials resulted in none of the designs having acceptable Type I error rate. Under the null hypothesis of no carryover the difference is well above the nominal 5 % error rate. When a treatment is effective during the intervention period, reliable testing for a carryover effect is difficult. Neither parallel-group nor cross-over designs using the difference in cumulative incidence appear to be a feasible approach. Future trials should ensure their design and analysis is validated by simulation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 8%
Unknown 12 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Other 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 31%
Environmental Science 2 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 2 15%