JSM 2005 Online Program

Abstract #302572

This is the preliminary program for the 2005 Joint Statistical Meetings in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Currently included in this program is the "technical" program, schedule of invited, topic contributed, regular contributed and poster sessions; Continuing Education courses (August 7-10, 2005); and Committee and Business Meetings. This on-line program will be updated frequently to reflect the most current revisions.

To View the Program:
You may choose to view all activities of the program or just parts of it at any one time. All activities are arranged by date and time.

The views expressed here are those of the individual authors
and not necessarily those of the ASA or its board, officers, or staff.

The Program has labeled the meeting rooms with "letters" preceding the name of the room, designating in which facility the room is located:

Minneapolis Convention Center = “MCC” Hilton Minneapolis Hotel = “H” Hyatt Regency Minneapolis = “HY”

Back to main JSM 2005 Program page

Legend:

= Applied Session,

= Theme Session,

= Presenter

Activity Number:	463
Type:	Invited
Date/Time:	Thursday, August 11, 2005 : 8:30 AM to 10:20 AM
Sponsor:	Biopharmaceutical Section
Abstract - #302572
Title:	Adaptive Allocation Methods for Balance of Treatment Assignment
Author(s):	Susan Ellenberg*+
Companies:	University of Pennsylvania
Address:	Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Philadelphia, PA, 19104,
Keywords:	Dynamic Allocation ; Treatment Balance ; Randomization ; Prognostic Factors
Abstract:	Probably the most common method of ensuring balance of treatment assignments within important patient subgroups in clinical trials is stratified randomization. This method involves creating strata for all combinations of factors and creating separate randomization lists for each combination. For example, if one wished to ensure approximately equal numbers of subjects were assigned to each of two treatments within subgroups defined by age (say, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61 and over), gender, and clinical site (assume 5 participating sites), one would require 4x2x5=40 separate randomization lists. Unless the number of individuals to be entered into the study is quite large, such an approach may be no more likely to ensure balance overall and separately by age, gender, and site than simple, unstratified randomization.

The address information is for the authors that have a + after their name.
Authors who are presenting talks have a * after their name.

Back to the full JSM 2005 program