Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30931547›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2019

Approaches to treatment effect heterogeneity in the presence of confounding.

Sarah C Anoke, Sharon-Lise Normand, Corwin M Zigler

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A perspective on individualized treatment effects estimation from time-series health data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Sarah C AnokeDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0002-3331-0895
Sharon-Lise NormandDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0001-7027-4769
Corwin M ZiglerDepartment of Statistics and Data Sciences, College of Natural Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas.

Funding

BIOSTATISTICS/EPIDEMIOLOGY TRAINING GRANTS IN AIDST32AI007358 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Michael David Hughes · 1989 to 2026
$12.4M
Statistical Methods for the Spatio-Temporal Assessment of Social Disparities in CancerP01CA134294 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI HANEUSE, SEBASTIEN, HERNAN, MIGUEL · 2008 to 2017
$6.8M
Bayesian Methods for Comparative Effectiveness Research with Observational DataR01GM111339 · NIGMS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI NORMAND, SHARON-LISE TERESA · 2015 to 2018
$2.5M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA134294NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007358NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM111339
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The literature on causal effect estimation tends to focus on the population mean estimand, which is less informative as medical treatments are becoming more personalized and there is increasing awareness that subpopulations of individuals may experience a group-specific effect that differs from the population average. In fact, it is possible that there is underlying systematic effect heterogeneity that is obscured by focusing on the population mean estimand. In this context, understanding which covariates contribute to this treatment effect heterogeneity (TEH) and how these covariates determine the differential treatment effect (TE) is an important consideration. Towards such an understanding, this paper briefly reviews three approaches used in making causal inferences and conducts a simulation study to compare these approaches according to their performance in an exploratory evaluation of TEH when the heterogeneous subgroups are not known a priori. Performance metrics include the detection of any heterogeneity, the identification and characterization of heterogeneous subgroups, and unconfounded estimation of the TE within subgroups. The methods are then deployed in a comparative effectiveness evaluation of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents among 54 099 Medicare beneficiaries in the continental United States admitted to a hospital with acute myocardial infarction in 2008.

Indexed as

CausalityConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicBayes TheoremComputer SimulationHumansPropensity ScoreRegression AnalysisTreatment Outcomecausal inferenceconfoundingeffect modificationobservational datasubgroup estimationtreatment effect heterogeneity

Identifiers

PMID30931547
PMCPMC6613382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.