Implementing Clinical Research Using Factorial Designs: A Primer.

Implementing Clinical Research Using Factorial Designs: A Primer.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.beth.2016.12.005
复制
发表时间:
2017-07
期刊:
影响因子:
3.7
通讯作者:
Collins LM
Collins LM
中科院分区:
心理学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Baker TB;Smith SS;Bolt DM;Loh WY;Mermelstein R;Fiore MC;Piper ME;Collins LM

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

析因实验很少用于临床干预措施的开发或评估。然而,析因设计比随机对照试验设计更有优势,后者在此类研究中使用的频率要高得多。析因设计是高效的(允许用良好的统计能力对多个干预成分进行评估),并提供了检测干预成分之间相互作用的机会。这些优势促使方法学家倡导在临床干预研究中更多地使用析因设计。然而,考虑在临床研究中使用这种设计的研究人员面临着一系列选择,这些选择对实验结果的可解释性和价值具有必然的影响。这些选择包括:是否使用析因设计,要包括的因素的数量和类型的选择,如何处理所包括的不同因素的兼容性,是否以及如何避免参与者接受的干预类型和数量之间的混淆,以及如何解释互动。在临床干预研究中使用析因设计提供了与随机临床试验设计中通常考虑的不同的选择。然而,前者的巨大信息量鼓励临床研究人员增加并仔细执行此类设计。
Factorial experiments have rarely been used in the development or evaluation of clinical interventions. However, factorial designs offer advantages over randomized controlled trial designs, the latter being much more frequently used in such research. Factorial designs are highly efficient (permitting evaluation of multiple intervention components with good statistical power) and present the opportunity to detect interactions amongst intervention components. Such advantages have led methodologists to advocate for the greater use of factorial designs in research on clinical interventions. However, researchers considering the use of such designs in clinical research face a series of choices that have consequential implications for the interpretability and value of the experimental results. These choices include: whether to use a factorial design, selection of the number and type of factors to include, how to address the compatibility of the different factors included, whether and how to avoid confounds between the type and number of interventions a participant receives, and how to interpret interactions. The use of factorial designs in clinical intervention research poses choices that differ from those typically considered in randomized clinical trial designs. However, the great information yield of the former encourages clinical researchers’ increased and careful execution of such designs.