Adaptive Randomization via Mahalanobis Distance

In comparative studies, researchers often seek an optimal covariate balance. However, chance imbalance still exists in randomized experiments, and becomes more serious as the number of covariates increases. To address this issue, we introduce a new randomization procedure, called adaptive randomization via the Mahalanobis distance (ARM). The proposed method allocates units sequentially and adaptively, using information on the current level of imbalance and the incoming unit’s covariate. Theoretical results and numerical comparison show that with a large number of covariates or a large number of units, the proposed method shows substantial advantages over traditional methods in terms of the covariate balance, estimation accuracy, hypothesis testing power, and computational time. The proposed method attains the optimal covariate balance, in the sense that the estimated treatment effect attains its minimum variance asymptotically, and can be applied in both causal inference and clinical trials. Lastly, numerical stud1 Statistica Sinica: Preprint doi:10.5705/ss.202020.0440

[1]  Jun Shao,et al.  Principles for Covariate Adjustment in Analyzing Randomized Clinical Trials , 2020 .

[2]  A. Banerjee,et al.  A Theory of Experimenters: Robustness, Randomization, and Balance , 2020, American Economic Review.

[3]  Uri Shalit,et al.  Harmonizing Optimized Designs With Classic Randomization in Experiments , 2020 .

[4]  P. Ding,et al.  Rerandomization and regression adjustment , 2019, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology).

[5]  F. Hu,et al.  Statistical Inference for Covariate-Adaptive Randomization Procedures , 2018, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[6]  Anru Zhang,et al.  Sequential rerandomization , 2017, Biometrika.

[7]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Asymptotic theory of rerandomization in treatment–control experiments , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Donald B Rubin,et al.  Rerandomization to Balance Tiers of Covariates , 2015, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[9]  Zhenjun Ma,et al.  Adaptive randomization for balancing over covariates , 2014 .

[10]  Feifang Hu,et al.  Balancing continuous covariates based on Kernel densities. , 2013, Contemporary clinical trials.

[11]  Yunzhi Lin,et al.  Balancing continuous and categorical baseline covariates in sequential clinical trials using the area between empirical cumulative distribution functions , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  W. Lin,et al.  Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining Freedman's critique , 2012, 1208.2301.

[13]  F. Hu,et al.  Asymptotic properties of covariate-adaptive randomization , 2012, 1210.4666.

[14]  Kari Lock Morgan,et al.  Rerandomization to improve covariate balance in experiments , 2012, 1207.5625.

[15]  Maroussa Zagoraiou,et al.  The covariate-adaptive biased coin design for balancing clinical trials in the presence of prognostic factors , 2011 .

[16]  Kari Lock Morgan Rerandomization to Improve Covariate Balance in Randomized Experiments , 2011 .

[17]  Wenle Zhao,et al.  Quantifying the cost in power of ignoring continuous covariate imbalances in clinical trial randomization. , 2011, Contemporary clinical trials.

[18]  Jun Shao,et al.  A theory for testing hypotheses under covariate-adaptive randomization , 2010 .

[19]  D. Taves,et al.  Rank-Minimization for balanced assignment of subjects in clinical trials. , 2010, Contemporary clinical trials.

[20]  Miriam Bruhn,et al.  In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments , 2008 .

[21]  D. Rubin For objective causal inference, design trumps analysis , 2008, 0811.1640.

[22]  David A. Freedman,et al.  On regression adjustments to experimental data , 2008, Adv. Appl. Math..

[23]  Marion K Campbell,et al.  The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials. a review. , 2002, Controlled clinical trials.

[24]  A. Tsiatis,et al.  Efficiency Study of Estimators for a Treatment Effect in a Pretest–Posttest Trial , 2001 .

[25]  James Frane,et al.  A Method of Biased Coin Randomization, Its Implementation, and Its Validation , 1998 .

[26]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Affinely Invariant Matching Methods with Ellipsoidal Distributions , 1992 .

[27]  F K Hoehler,et al.  Balancing allocation of subjects in biomedical research: a minimization strategy based on ranks. , 1987, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[28]  A. Atkinson Optimum biased coin designs for sequential clinical trials with prognostic factors , 1982 .

[29]  S. Pocock,et al.  Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. , 1975, Biometrics.

[30]  W. G. Cochran,et al.  Controlling Bias in Observational Studies: A Review. , 1974 .

[31]  D R Taves,et al.  Minimization: A new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups , 1974, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[32]  J. L. Hodges,et al.  Design for the Control of Selection Bias , 1957 .

[33]  D. Rubin,et al.  Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: Sensitivity Analysis and Bounds , 2015 .

[34]  Rory A. Fisher,et al.  The Arrangement of Field Experiments , 1992 .

[35]  R. Horwitz The planning of observational studies of human populations , 1979 .