ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Power and Design Issues in Crossover-Based N-Of-1 Clinical Trials with Fixed Data Collection Periods.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical differences in sirolimus treatment with low target levels between children and adults with vascular malformations - A nationwide trial.Clinical and translational science · 2023Trial
- Power analysis for idiographic (within-subject) clinical trials: Implications for treatments of rare conditions and precision medicine.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Exploring human biology with N-of-1 clinical trials.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023Article
- Magnitude and relevance of change in health-related quality of life in patients with vascular malformations treated with sirolimus.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Accommodating Serial Correlation and Sequential Design Elements in Personalized Studies and Aggregated Personalized Studies.Harvard data science review · 2022Article
- N-of-1 Trials in Healthcare.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Optimizing Aggregated N-Of-1 Trial Designs for Predictive Biomarker Validation: Statistical Methods and Theoretical Findings.Frontiers in digital health · 2020Article
- Some t-tests for N-of-1 trials with serial correlation.PloS one · 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
"N-of-1," or single subject, clinical trials seek to determine if an intervention strategy is more efficacious for an individual than an alternative based on an objective, empirical, and controlled study. The design of such trials is typically rooted in a simple crossover strategy with multiple intervention response evaluation periods. The effect of serial correlation between measurements, the number of evaluation periods, the use of washout periods, heteroscedasticity (i.e., unequal variances among responses to the interventions) and intervention-associated carry-over phenomena on the power of such studies is crucially important for putting the yield and feasibility of N-of-1 trial designs into context. We evaluated the effect of these phenomena on the power of different designs for N-of-1 trials using analytical theory based on standard likelihood principles assuming an autoregressive lag 1, i.e., AR(1), serial correlation structure among the measurements as well as simulation studies. By evaluating the power to detect effects in many different settings, we show that the influence of serial correlation and heteroscedasticity on power can be substantial, but can also be mitigated to some degree through the use of appropriate multiple evaluation periods. We also show that the detection of certain types of carry-over effects can be heavily influenced by design considerations as well.
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.