Table 5.

Simulation results for estimating optimal dynamic treatment regimes.

C%	S	${\widehat{\eta }}_1^{\text{opt}}$	${\widehat{\eta }}_2^{\text{opt}}$	${\widehat{\eta }}_3^{\text{opt}}$	${\widehat{\eta }}_4^{\text{opt}}$	Ŝ(η̂opt)	SE	CP	S(η̂opt)	MR
Senario 1: ηopt = (0.890,−0.456, 0.894,−0.447); S(3; ηopt) = 0.567
15	F	0.881 (0.035)	−0.468 (0.062)	0.893 (0.017)	−0.449 (0.033)	0.591 (0.028)	0.030	0.887	0.559 (0.008)	0.107 (0.054)
	T	0.884 (0.029)	−0.463 (0.052)	0.894 (0.013)	−0.448 (0.026)	0.570 (0.028)	0.030	0.955	0.561 (0.006)	0.088 (0.048)
40	F	0.878 (0.042)	−0.471 (0.072)	0.890 (0.022)	−0.453 (0.042)	0.600 (0.036)	0.037	0.841	0.555 (0.011)	0.125 (0.061)
	T	0.884 (0.034)	−0.463 (0.061)	0.892 (0.018)	−0.450 (0.035)	0.574 (0.035)	0.038	0.955	0.558 (0.009)	0.108 (0.056)
Senario 2: ηopt = (−0.891, 0.454, 0.894,−0.447); S(6; ηopt) = 0.624
15	F	−0.888 (0.025)	0.456 (0.045)	0.891 (0.018)	−0.452 (0.035)	0.645 (0.025)	0.027	0.890	0.615 (0.008)	0.099 (0.052)
	T	−0.889 (0.018)	0.456 (0.034)	0.893 (0.014)	−0.450 (0.028)	0.624 (0.024)	0.027	0.967	0.618 (0.005)	0.079 (0.042)
40	F	−0.886 (0.030)	0.459 (0.053)	0.890 (0.020)	−0.453 (0.038)	0.650 (0.027)	0.029	0.855	0.613 (0.010)	0.110 (0.055)
	T	−0.888 (0.022)	0.457 (0.040)	0.892 (0.016)	−0.451 (0.032)	0.626 (0.027)	0.030	0.972	0.617 (0.007)	0.091 (0.048)
Senario 3: ηopt = (0.908,−0.419, 0.894,−0.447); S(3; ηopt) = 0.702
15	F	0.897 (0.037)	−0.434 (0.069)	0.892 (0.020)	−0.449 (0.039)	0.728 (0.026)	0.027	0.829	0.692 (0.009)	0.134 (0.067)
	T	0.900 (0.031)	−0.430 (0.060)	0.893 (0.016)	−0.448 (0.031)	0.707 (0.026)	0.027	0.952	0.695 (0.007)	0.116 (0.061)
40	F	0.895 (0.041)	−0.437 (0.075)	0.891 (0.023)	−0.451 (0.043)	0.732 (0.028)	0.029	0.809	0.691 (0.010)	0.142 (0.073)
	T	0.899 (0.035)	−0.431 (0.066)	0.893 (0.019)	−0.449 (0.036)	0.709 (0.028)	0.030	0.951	0.693 (0.008)	0.126 (0.066)

^†C% denotes the censoring rate; S indicates whether the smoothing technique is applied (T) or not (F).