Active Treatment-Controlled Experiment
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
↑ http://www.wiley.com/legacy/wileychi/eosbs/pdfs/bsa099.pdf
An Active Treatment-Controlled Experiment is a treatment controlled experiment where the comparator treatment is an active treatment (and is given to a treatment-controlled group member).
- Context:
- It can range from being a Two-Treatment Controlled Experiment (A/B test) to being an n-Treatment Controlled Experiment.
- It can range from being a Randomized Treatment-Controlled Experiment to being a Heuristic Treatment-Controlled Experiment.
- …
- Example(s):
- Counter-Example(s):
- an Inactive Comparator Study, such as a placebo controlled experiment.
- an A/A Test.
- See: Parallel Import.
References
2015a
- (Wikipedia, 2015) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/clinical_trial#Active_comparator_studies Retrieved:2015-6-9.
- Of note, during the last 10 years or so, it has become a common practice to conduct "active comparator" studies (also known as "active control" trials). In other words, when a treatment is clearly better than doing nothing for the subject (i.e. giving them the placebo), the alternate treatment would be a standard-of-care therapy. The study would compare the 'test' treatment to standard-of-care therapy.
A growing trend in the pharmacology field involves the use of third-party contractors to obtain the required comparator compounds. Such third parties provide expertise in the logistics of obtaining, storing, and shipping the comparators. As an advantage to the manufacturer of the comparator compounds, a well-established comparator sourcing agency can alleviate the problem of parallel importing (importing a patented compound for sale in a country outside the patenting agency's sphere of influence).
- Of note, during the last 10 years or so, it has become a common practice to conduct "active comparator" studies (also known as "active control" trials). In other words, when a treatment is clearly better than doing nothing for the subject (i.e. giving them the placebo), the alternate treatment would be a standard-of-care therapy. The study would compare the 'test' treatment to standard-of-care therapy.
2015b
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatment_and_control_groups
- … In some medical studies, where it may be unethical not to treat patients who present with symptoms, controls may be given a standard treatment, rather than no treatment at all.[1] Another alternative is to select controls from a wider population, provided that this population is well-defined and that those presenting with symptoms at the clinic are representative of those in the wider population.
- ↑ Bailey, R. A. (2008). Design of comparative experiments. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-68357-9. MR2422352. http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~rab/DOEbook/.
2005
- (Everitt & Howell, 2005) ⇒ Brian S. Everitt, and D. Howell. (2005). “Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science." Wiley. ISBN:9780470860809
- QUOTE: In a controlled observational cohort study, two groups of subjects are selected from two populations that (hopefully) differ in only one characteristic at the start. The groups of subjects are studied for a specific period and contrasted at the end of the study period. For instance, smokers and nonsmokers are studied for a period of 10 years, and at the end the proportions of smokers and nonsmokers that died in that period are compared. On the other hand, in an intervention study, the subjects are selected from one population with a particular characteristic present; then, immediately after baseline, the total study group is split up into a group that receives the intervention and a group that does not receive that intervention (control group). The comparison of the outcomes of the two groups at the end of the study period is an evaluation of the intervention. For instance, smokers can be divided into those who will be subject to a smoking-cessation program and those who will not be motivated to stop smoking. [1]
- QUOTE: In a controlled observational cohort study, two groups of subjects are selected from two populations that (hopefully) differ in only one characteristic at the start. The groups of subjects are studied for a specific period and contrasted at the end of the study period. For instance, smokers and nonsmokers are studied for a period of 10 years, and at the end the proportions of smokers and nonsmokers that died in that period are compared. On the other hand, in an intervention study, the subjects are selected from one population with a particular characteristic present; then, immediately after baseline, the total study group is split up into a group that receives the intervention and a group that does not receive that intervention (control group). The comparison of the outcomes of the two groups at the end of the study period is an evaluation of the intervention. For instance, smokers can be divided into those who will be subject to a smoking-cessation program and those who will not be motivated to stop smoking. [1]
2000
- (Concato et al., 2000) ⇒ John Concato, Nirav Shah, and Ralph I. Horwitz. (2000). “Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs.” In: New England Journal of Medicine, 342(25).