Trial reportTrials2018
Improved adherence adjustment in the Coronary Drug Project.
Trial report in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT00000482. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Coronary Drug Project
Safety of Reduced Methotrexate Lab Monitoring: a Population-based, Target Trial Emulation Study
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving rheumatoid arthritis comparative effectiveness research through causal inference principles: systematic review using a target trial emulation framework.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Estimating the effect of pravastatin vs usual care under full adherence in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial-Lipid Lowering Trial.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Trial
- Use of Machine Learning to Estimate the Per-Protocol Effect of Low-Dose Aspirin on Pregnancy Outcomes: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- Medicine's 'Basic' Mistake: How the Molecular Revolution Displaced an Entire Category of Inquiry.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Review
- Article
- Estimating per-protocol effects in external comparator analyses using real-world data.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Review
- Article
- Can algorithms replace expert knowledge for causal inference? A case study on novice use of causal discovery.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Synthesizing Subject-matter Expertise for Variable Selection in Causal Effect Estimation: A Case Study.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Forgiveness Is the Attribute of the Strong: Nonadherence and Regimen Shortening in Drug-sensitive Tuberculosis.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2023Article
- Estimation of the Average Causal Effect in Longitudinal Data With Time-Varying Exposures: The Challenge of Nonpositivity and the Impact of Model Flexibility.American journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Analysis approaches to address treatment nonadherence in pragmatic trials with point-treatment settings: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors vs Sulfonylureas in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.JAMA internal medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Association of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors With the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes in Children and Adolescents.JAMA psychiatry · 2021Article
- Adjusting for adherence in randomized trials when adherence is measured as a continuous variable: An application to the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2020Article
- Article
- Defining and Identifying Per-protocol Effects in Randomized Trials.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2020Article
- Adherence-adjustment in placebo-controlled randomized trials: An application to the candesartan in heart failure randomized trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe survival difference between adherers and non-adherers to placebo in the Coronary Drug Project has been used to support the thesis that adherence adjustment in randomized trials is not generally possible and, therefore, that only intention-to-treat analyses should be trusted. We previously demonstrated that adherence adjustment can be validly conducted in the Coronary Drug Project using a simplistic approach. Here, we re-analyze the data using an approach that takes full advantage of recent methodological developments.
methodsWe used inverse-probability weighted hazards models to estimate the 5-year survival and mortality risk when individuals in the placebo arm of the Coronary Drug Project adhere to at least 80% of the drug continuously or never during the 5-year follow-up period.
resultsAdjustment for post-randomization covariates resulted in 5-year mortality risk difference estimates ranging from - 0.7 (95% confidence intervals (CI), - 12.2, 10.7) to 4.5 (95% CI, - 6.3, 15.3) percentage points.
conclusionsOur analysis confirms that appropriate adjustment for post-randomization predictors of adherence largely removes the association between adherence to placebo and mortality originally described in this trial.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00000482 . Registered retrospectively on 27 October 1999.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.