BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Joseph S. Koopmeiners

Joseph S. Koopmeiners contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
MethodologyApplications

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Jointly modeling multiple endpoints for efficient treatment effect estimation in randomized controlled trials

Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for evaluating the efficacy of an intervention. However, there is often a trade-off between selecting the most scientifically relevant primary endpoint versus a less relevant, but more powerful, endpoint. For example, in the context of tobacco regulatory science many trials evaluate cigarettes per day as the primary endpoint instead of abstinence from smoking due to limited power. Additionally, it is often of interest to consider subgroup analyses to answer additional questions; such analyses are rarely adequately powered. In practice, trials often collect multiple endpoints. Heuristically, if multiple endpoints demonstrate a similar treatment effect we would be more confident in the results of this trial. However, there is limited research on leveraging information from secondary endpoints besides using composite endpoints which can be difficult to interpret. In this paper, we develop an estimator for the treatment effect on the primary endpoint based on a joint model for primary and secondary efficacy endpoints. This estimator gains efficiency over the standard treatment effect estimator when the model is correctly specified but is robust to model misspecification via model averaging. We illustrate our approach by estimating the effect of very low nicotine content cigarettes on the proportion of Black people who smoke who achieve abstinence and find our approach reduces the standard error by 27%.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Bayesian Spatial Models for Voxel-wise Prostate Cancer Classification Using Multi-parametric MRI Data

Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) plays an increasingly important role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Various computer-aided detection algorithms have been proposed for automated prostate cancer detection by combining information from various mpMRI data components. However, there exist other features of mpMRI, including the spatial correlation between voxels and between-patient heterogeneity in the mpMRI parameters, that have not been fully explored in the literature but could potentially improve cancer detection if leveraged appropriately. This paper proposes novel voxel-wise Bayesian classifiers for prostate cancer that account for the spatial correlation and between-patient heterogeneity in mpMRI. Modeling the spatial correlation is challenging due to the extreme high dimensionality of the data, and we consider three computationally efficient approaches using Nearest Neighbor Gaussian Process (NNGP), knot-based reduced-rank approximation, and a conditional autoregressive (CAR) model, respectively. The between-patient heterogeneity is accounted for by adding a subject-specific random intercept on the mpMRI parameter model. Simulation results show that properly modeling the spatial correlation and between-patient heterogeneity improves classification accuracy. Application to in vivo data illustrates that classification is improved by spatial modeling using NNGP and reduced-rank approximation but not the CAR model, while modeling the between-patient heterogeneity does not further improve our classifier. Among our proposed models, the NNGP-based model is recommended considering its robust classification accuracy and high computational efficiency.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Borrowing from Supplemental Sources to Estimate Causal Effects from a Primary Data Source

The increasing multiplicity of data sources offers exciting possibilities in estimating the effects of a treatment, intervention, or exposure, particularly if observational and experimental sources could be used simultaneously. Borrowing between sources can potentially result in more efficient estimators, but it must be done in a principled manner to mitigate increased bias and Type I error. Furthermore, when the effect of treatment is confounded, as in observational sources or in clinical trials with noncompliance, causal effect estimators are needed to simultaneously adjust for confounding and to estimate effects across data sources. We consider the problem of estimating causal effects from a primary source and borrowing from any number of supplemental sources. We propose using regression-based estimators that borrow based on assuming exchangeability of the regression coefficients and parameters between data sources. Borrowing is accomplished with multisource exchangeability models and Bayesian model averaging. We show via simulation that a Bayesian linear model and Bayesian additive regression trees both have desirable properties and borrow under appropriate circumstances. We apply the estimators to recently completed trials of very low nicotine content cigarettes investigating their impact on smoking behavior.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Statistical design considerations for trials that study multiple indications

Breakthroughs in cancer biology have defined new research programs emphasizing the development of therapies that target specific pathways in tumor cells. Innovations in clinical trial design have followed with master protocols defined by inclusive eligibility criteria and evaluations of multiple therapies and/or histologies. Consequently, characterization of subpopulation heterogeneity has become central to the formulation and selection of a study design. However, this transition to master protocols has led to challenges in identifying the optimal trial design and proper calibration of hyperparameters. We often evaluate a range of null and alternative scenarios, however there has been little guidance on how to synthesize the potentially disparate recommendations for what may be optimal. This may lead to the selection of suboptimal designs and statistical methods that do not fully accommodate the subpopulation heterogeneity. This article proposes novel optimization criteria for calibrating and evaluating candidate statistical designs of master protocols in the presence of the potential for treatment effect heterogeneity among enrolled patient subpopulations. The framework is applied to demonstrate the statistical properties of conventional study designs when treatments offer heterogeneous benefit as well as identify optimal designs devised to monitor the potential for heterogeneity among patients with differing clinical indications using Bayesian modeling.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access