Final Research Report

View this project's final research report

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:

  • The reviewers noted that tests are necessary to verify that the methods for treatment selection developed in this study are better than the conventional approach to treatment selection. They indicated that such a hypothesis-testing approach was important in establishing the superiority of the researchers’ approach. The researchers agreed that such an evaluation would be important for establishing their approach but that this work was beyond the scope of the current study. They did propose a resampling procedure in the report to allow for such method comparisons.
  • The reviewers asked how loss functions, which help to estimate the potential downside for choosing one treatment over another, should be chosen given that different loss functions would lead to different treatment assignment strategies. The researchers explained that the solution was largely mathematical.  In response to this question, the researchers expanded the report’s discussion of alternate mathematical strategies designed to minimize the loss function in order to maximize the value of the treatment assignment.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Project Information

Menggang Yu, PhD
University of Wisconsin-Madison
$1,459,660
10.25302/10.2020.ME.140921219
Matching Complex Patients to Treatments: Innovative Statistical Scoring Methods for Treatment Selection^

Key Dates

April 2015
July 2020
2015
2020

Study Registration Information

^This project was previously titled: Developing Statistical Methods to Help Doctors and Patients Decide on the Right Treatment

Tags

Has Results
Award Type
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: March 4, 2022