(Total Views: 634)
Posted On: 10/25/2020 1:32:59 AM
Post# of 148936
blafarm, I 100% agree with your statements about making sure we differentiate the facts from assumptions. I wish we could see the facts so we would not have to read the tea leaves to try and divine the outcome.
The one area that does interest me though is why would the DMSC committee add the 75% review unless they felt that there was some event happening at that timeframe? If we were meeting or just below p < .05 then the normal recommendation would be to let the trial finish. At 75% we would just be over p <.05 and no other action would be necessary for the DMSC other than to say continue. There has to be some significant event that could happen at 75% or it doesn't make sense to stop it so soon and risk interrupting the trial again.
…Sorry for more fact-less reading of the tea leaves
The one area that does interest me though is why would the DMSC committee add the 75% review unless they felt that there was some event happening at that timeframe? If we were meeting or just below p < .05 then the normal recommendation would be to let the trial finish. At 75% we would just be over p <.05 and no other action would be necessary for the DMSC other than to say continue. There has to be some significant event that could happen at 75% or it doesn't make sense to stop it so soon and risk interrupting the trial again.
…Sorry for more fact-less reading of the tea leaves
(3)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
