Abstract
In this chapter, we discuss several original clinical trials for composite binary endpoints along with their designs, results, and possible limitations. The focus of this chapter is to propose and apply alternative planning and analysis strategies which might help to improve the performance of the design or to ease interpretation of results.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adzick, N. S., Thom, E. A., Spong, C. Y., Brock, J. W., Burrows, P. K., Johnson, M. P., et al. (2011). A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. New England Journal of Medicine, 364, 993–1004.
Rauch, G., & Kieser, M. (2012). Multiplicity adjustment for composite binary endpoints. Methods of Information in Medicine, 51, 309–317.
Rauch, G., & Kieser, M. (2013). An expected power approach for the assessment of composite endpoints and their components. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 60, 111–122.
Yuksel, N., Majumdar, S. R., Biggs, C., & Tsuyuki, R. T. (2010). Community pharmacist-initiated screening program for osteoporosis: Randomized controlled trial. Osteoporosis International, 21, 391–398.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rauch, G., Schüler, S., Kieser, M. (2017). Clinical Trial Examples with (Composite) Binary Endpoints. In: Planning and Analyzing Clinical Trials with Composite Endpoints. Springer Series in Pharmaceutical Statistics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73770-6_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73770-6_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73769-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73770-6
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)