Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31190690›Full record

ArticleAnnals of statistics2019

ON TESTING CONDITIONAL QUALITATIVE TREATMENT EFFECTS.

Chengchun Shi, Rui Song, Wenbin Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of statistics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Chengchun ShiDepartment of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Rui SongDepartment of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Wenbin LuDepartment of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.

Funding

Statistical Methods for Cancer Clinical TrialsP01CA142538 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVIDIAN, MARIE, KOSOROK, MICHAEL R · 2010 to 2019
$21.3M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA142538
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precision medicine is an emerging medical paradigm that focuses on finding the most effective treatment strategy tailored for individual patients. In the literature, most of the existing works focused on estimating the optimal treatment regime. However, there has been less attention devoted to hypothesis testing regarding the optimal treatment regime. In this paper, we first introduce the notion of conditional qualitative treatment effects (CQTE) of a set of variables given another set of variables and provide a class of equivalent representations for the null hypothesis of no CQTE. The proposed definition of CQTE does not assume any parametric form for the optimal treatment rule and plays an important role for assessing the incremental value of a set of new variables in optimal treatment decision making conditional on an existing set of prescriptive variables. We then propose novel testing procedures for no CQTE based on kernel estimation of the conditional contrast functions. We show that our test statistics have asymptotically correct size and non-negligible power against some nonstandard local alternatives. The empirical performance of the proposed tests are evaluated by simulations and an application to an AIDS data set.

Indexed as

Conditional qualitative treatment effectsKernel estimationNonstandard local alternativesOptimal treatment decision making

Identifiers

PMID31190690
PMCPMC6561732

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.