The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improving Efficiency of Inferences in Randomized Clinical Trials Using Auxiliary Covariates
Open accessAbstract
Summary The primary goal of a randomized clinical trial is to make comparisons among two or more treatments. For example, in a two‐arm trial with continuous response, the focus may be on the difference in treatment means; with more than two treatments, the comparison may be based on pairwise differences. With binary outcomes, pairwise odds ratios or log odds ratios may be used. In general, comparisons may be based on meaningful parameters in a relevant statistical model. Standard analyses for estimation and testing in this context typically are based on the data collected on response and treatment assignment only. In many trials, auxiliary baseline covariate information may also be available, and it is of interest to exploit these data to improve the efficiency of inferences. Taking a semiparametric theory perspective, we propose a broadly applicable approach to adjustment for auxiliary covariates to achieve more efficient estimators and tests for treatment parameters in the analysis of randomized clinical trials. Simulations and applications demonstrate the performance of the methods.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vaart, A. W. V. D. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802256 · Cited by 4,159
Pocock, S. J., Assmann, S. E., Enos, L. E., & Kasten, L. E. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1296 · Cited by 1,077
Cited by
Bolinder, J., Ljunggren, Ö., Kullberg, J., Johansson, L., Wilding, J., Langkilde, A. M., Sugg, J., & Parikh, S. (2012) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2011-2260 · Cited by 867
Daniel, R., Zhang, J., & Farewell, D. (2021) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201900297 · Cited by 167
Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects with right-censored data via causal survival forests
Cui, Y., Kosorok, M. R., Sverdrup, E., Wager, S., & Zhu, R. (2023) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1093/jrsssb/qkac001 · Cited by 117
Covariate-adjusted Fisher randomization tests for the average treatment effect
Zhao, A., & Ding, P. (2021) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.04.007 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, M., Tsiatis, A. A., & Davidian, M.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-01-11
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 707-715
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0420
- OpenAlex
- W2024566912
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving Efficiency of Inferences in Randomized Clinical Trials Using Auxiliary Covariates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00976.x
- The paper
- Zhang, M., Tsiatis, A. A., & Davidian, M. (2008). Improving Efficiency of Inferences in Randomized Clinical Trials Using Auxiliary Covariates. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00976.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.