ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022
Bayesian adaptive design for pediatric clinical trials incorporating a community of prior beliefs.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolving Real-World Data and Evidence Use for New Drugs and Regenerative Medical Products Approvals in Japan-An Analysis of the 6-Year Trend.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- Navigating challenges in pediatric trial conduct: integrating bayesian sequential design with semiparametric elicitation for handling primary and secondary endpoints.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Using Bayesian statistics in confirmatory clinical trials in the regulatory setting: a tutorial review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Review
- Conducting a bayesian multi-armed trial with response adaptive randomization for comparative effectiveness of medications for CSPN.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- Management of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children: Decision-Making Regarding a New Condition in the Absence of Clinical Trial Data.The Canadian journal of cardiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPediatric population presents several barriers for clinical trial design and analysis, including ethical constraints on the sample size and slow accrual rate. Bayesian adaptive design methods could be considered to address these challenges in pediatric clinical trials.
methodsWe developed an innovative Bayesian adaptive design method and demonstrated the approach as a re-design of a published phase III pediatric trial. The innovative design used early success criteria based on skeptical prior and early futility criteria based on enthusiastic prior extrapolated from a historical adult trial, and the early and late stopping boundaries were calibrated to ensure a one-sided type I error of 2.5%. We also constructed several alternative designs which incorporated only one type of prior belief and the same stopping boundaries. To identify a preferred design, we compared operating characteristics including power, expected trial size and trial duration for all the candidate adaptive designs via simulation when performing an increasing number of equally spaced interim analyses.
resultsWhen performing an increasing number of equally spaced interim analyses, the innovative Bayesian adaptive trial design incorporating both skeptical and enthusiastic priors at both interim and final analyses outperforms alternative designs which only consider one type of prior belief, because it allows more reduction in sample size and trial duration while still offering good trial design properties including controlled type I error rate and sufficient power.
conclusionsDesigning a Bayesian adaptive pediatric trial with both skeptical and enthusiastic priors can be an efficient and robust approach for early trial stopping, thus potentially saving time and money for trial conduction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.