← Back to home
Comparison · Analytics

DoseFinding vs rbmi

A side-by-side editorial comparison of DoseFinding and rbmi — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.

Shared themes:clinical-trials

DoseFinding vs rbmi: at a glance

FeatureDoseFindingrbmi
SectorAnalyticsAnalytics
Velocity score0.02.5
Sparks · 30d00
Top themesdose-response, mcp-mod, clinical-trials, model-averagingclinical-trials, missing-data, multiple-imputation, pharmaverse
Last editorial update1h ago3h ago
WebsiteVisit →Visit →

What is DoseFinding?

New stewardship at openpharma, then two releases adding the methods MCP-Mod was missing

DoseFinding implements MCP-Mod and related dose-response methodology for clinical trial design and analysis. In 2024 it changed hands — Marius Thomas took over as maintainer, Novartis was recorded as copyright holder and funder, and the package moved to the openpharma GitHub organisation with roxygen documentation and a proper NEWS file. The two releases since have added substantive methodology: model averaging for dose-response fitting in 1.3-1, and conditional and predictive power for interim analyses in 1.4-1.

Read the full DoseFinding trajectory →

What is rbmi?

Reference-based multiple imputation for trials, now shipping without Bayesian support by default.

rbmi implements reference-based multiple imputation for longitudinal clinical trial data with missing values — the estimand machinery regulators expect for handling intercurrent events and dropout. The consequential recent change was 1.3.0 moving rstan from a hard dependency to Suggests, which takes Bayesian imputation out of the default install. Since then the work has been documentation and nomenclature discipline: 1.6.1 standardized on MNAR over a mixed NMAR/MNAR vocabulary and deprecated the nmar.rm argument accordingly.

Read the full rbmi trajectory →

DoseFinding vs rbmi: editorial side-by-side

D
DoseFinding
ANALYTICS
0.0

New stewardship at openpharma, then two releases adding the methods MCP-Mod was missing

◆ Current state

DoseFinding implements MCP-Mod and related dose-response methodology for clinical trial design and analysis. In 2024 it changed hands — Marius Thomas took over as maintainer, Novartis was recorded as copyright holder and funder, and the package moved to the openpharma GitHub organisation with roxygen documentation and a proper NEWS file. The two releases since have added substantive methodology: model averaging for dose-response fitting in 1.3-1, and conditional and predictive power for interim analyses in 1.4-1.

◆ Where it's heading

The pattern before the handover was maintenance — R-devel compliance, a bug fix, a link. After it, each release carries a named methodological addition with an acknowledged contributor, plus documentation to match: a longitudinal analysis vignette shipped alongside the interim power work. Housekeeping continues underneath, mostly clearing deprecated ggplot2 interfaces, aes_string in one release and qplot in the next.

◆ Prediction

Given the last two releases each added one method with a supporting vignette, expect the next to follow the same shape. Both additions so far extend the package beyond fixed dose-response fitting, so adaptive and interim methodology is the more likely direction.

R
rbmi
ANALYTICS
2.5

Reference-based multiple imputation for trials, now shipping without Bayesian support by default.

◆ Current state

rbmi implements reference-based multiple imputation for longitudinal clinical trial data with missing values — the estimand machinery regulators expect for handling intercurrent events and dropout. The consequential recent change was 1.3.0 moving rstan from a hard dependency to Suggests, which takes Bayesian imputation out of the default install. Since then the work has been documentation and nomenclature discipline: 1.6.1 standardized on MNAR over a mixed NMAR/MNAR vocabulary and deprecated the nmar.rm argument accordingly.

◆ Where it's heading

The package is optimizing for adoption friction over feature breadth. Dropping a compiled Stan dependency from the default install, deprecating a bespoke seed argument in favor of base set.seed(), and aligning lsmeans() behavior and weight naming with emmeans all point the same direction — behave like a conventional R package rather than a specialized one. Documentation work in 1.6.1 covering @return on every exported function and executable examples reads as preparation for validation scrutiny rather than user demand.

◆ Prediction

Given the FAQ vignette's validation statement and the recent documentation completeness pass, the next work is more likely qualification and estimand documentation than new imputation methods.

Alternatives to DoseFinding and rbmi

Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either DoseFinding or rbmi.

See all DoseFinding alternatives → · See all rbmi alternatives →

Recent activity from DoseFinding and rbmi

Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.

  1. 22d agorbmiMNAR nomenclature standardized, documentation completed
  2. 1y agoDoseFindingConditional and predictive power for interim analyses
  3. 1y agoDoseFindingModel averaging arrives for dose-response fitting
  4. 1y agorbmirstan demoted to Suggests, Bayesian imputation now opt-in
  5. 1y agoDoseFindingPackage moves to openpharma under new maintainership
  6. 2y agoDoseFindingCompliance update for R-devel
  7. 2y agorbmirbmi v1.2.5
  8. 3y agoDoseFindingpowMCTBinCount bug fix

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between DoseFinding and rbmi?

Both compete on the same themes — clinical-trials — within Analytics. rbmi is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 2.5 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.

Is DoseFinding better than rbmi?

Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. rbmi is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 2.5 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.

What are the best alternatives to DoseFinding?

Top DoseFinding alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "DoseFinding alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/dosefinding for the full list with editorial commentary on each.

What are the best alternatives to rbmi?

Top rbmi alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "rbmi alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/rbmi for the full list with editorial commentary on each.