Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23943775›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

A generalised model for individualising a treatment recommendation based on group-level evidence from randomised clinical trials.

Maura Marcucci, John C Sinclair

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05237635 (Defining Decision Thresholds for Judgments on Health Benefits and Harms Using the GRADE Evidence to Decision), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05237635 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Defining Decision Thresholds for Judgments on Health Benefits and Harms Using the GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) Frameworks: Protocol for a Randomized Methodological Study (GRADE-THRESHOLD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2020 to 2022Enrolled1,406ConditionsDecision Support Techniques, GRADE ApproachArmsdescriptive case-scenarios
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maura MarcucciDepartments of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
John C Sinclair
McMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesRandomised controlled trials report group-level treatment effects. However, an individual patient confronting a treatment decision needs to know whether that person's expected treatment benefit will exceed the expected treatment harm. We describe a flexible model for individualising a treatment decision. It individualises group-level results from randomised trials using clinical prediction guides.

methodsWe constructed models that estimate the size of individualised absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the target outcome that is required to offset individualised absolute risk increase (ARI) for the treatment harm. Inputs to the model include estimates for the individualised predicted absolute treatment benefit and harm, and the relative value assigned by the patient to harm/benefit. A decision rule recommends treatment when the predicted benefit exceeds the predicted harm, value-adjusted. We also derived expressions for the maximum treatment harm, or the maximum relative value for harm/benefit, above which treatment would not be recommended.

resultsFor the simpler model, including one kind of benefit and one kind of harm, the individualised ARR required to justify treatment was expressed as required ARRtarget(i)=ARIharm(i) × RVharm/target(i). A complex model was also developed, applicable to treatments causing multiple kinds of benefits and/or harms. We demonstrated the applicability of the models to treatments tested in superiority trials (either placebo or active control, either fixed harm or variable harm) and non-inferiority trials.

conclusionsIndividualised treatment recommendations can be derived using a model that applies clinical prediction guides to the results of randomised trials in order to identify which individual patients are likely to derive a clinically important benefit from the treatment. The resulting individualised prediction-based recommendations require validation by comparison with strategies of treat all or treat none.

Indexed as

STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID23943775
PMCPMC3752048
OpenAlexW2130620033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.