ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2018
LIBERTI: A SMART study in plastic surgery.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Individualized interventions and precision health: Lessons learned from a systematic review and implications for analytics-driven geriatric research.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023Pooled it
- A review of use of external data and update on reporting standards in Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomised Trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Review
- Understanding heterogeneity of responses to, and optimizing clinical efficacy of, exercise training in older adults: NIH NIA Workshop summary.GeroScience · 2023Review
- Adaptive Enrichment Designs in Clinical Trials.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2021Article
- Sample size considerations for comparing dynamic treatment regimens in a sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial with a continuous longitudinal outcome.Statistical methods in medical research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsLaser treatment of burns scars is considered by some providers to be standard of care. However, there is little evidence-based research as to the true benefit. A number of factors hinder evaluation of the benefit of laser treatment. These include significant heterogeneity in patient response and possible delayed effects from the laser treatment. Moreover, laser treatments are often provided sequentially using different types of equipment and settings, so there are effectively a large number of overall treatment options that need to be compared. We propose a trial capable of coping with these issues and that also attempts to take advantage of the heterogeneous response in order to estimate optimal treatment plans personalized to each individual patient. It will be the first large-scale randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of laser treatments for burns scars and, to our knowledge, the very first example of the utility of a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial in plastic surgery.
methodsWe propose using a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial design to investigate the effect of various permutations of laser treatment on hypertrophic burn scars. We will compare and test hypotheses regarding laser treatment effects at a general population level. Simultaneously, we hope to use the data generated to discover possible beneficial personalized treatment plans, tailored to individual patient characteristics.
resultsWe show that the proposed trial has good power to detect laser treatment effect at the overall population level, despite comparing a large number of treatment combinations. The trial will simultaneously provide high-quality data appropriate for estimating precision-medicine treatment rules. We detail population-level comparisons of interest and corresponding sample size calculations. We provide simulations to suggest the power of the trial to detect laser effect and also the possible benefits of personalization of laser treatment to individual characteristics.
conclusionWe propose, to our knowledge, the first use of a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial in surgery. The trial is rigorously designed so that it is reasonably straightforward to implement and powered to answer general overall questions of interest. The trial is also designed to provide data that are suitable for the estimation of beneficial precision-medicine treatment rules that depend both on individual patient characteristics and on-going real-time patient response to treatment.
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.