Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31646932›Full record

SynthesisMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2019

Statistical Methods for Adjusting Estimates of Treatment Effectiveness for Patient Nonadherence in the Context of Time-to-Event Outcomes and Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review of Methodological Papers.

Abualbishr Alshreef, Nicholas Latimer, Paul Tappenden, Ruth Wong, Dyfrig Hughes, James Fotheringham, Simon Dixon

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Testing for a Sweet Spot in Randomized Trials.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    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

7 authors.

Abualbishr AlshreefHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2737-1365
Nicholas LatimerHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Paul TappendenHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Ruth WongHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Dyfrig HughesCentre for Health Economics & Medicines Evaluation (CHEME), Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8247-7459
James FotheringhamSheffield Kidney Institute, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Simon DixonHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2017-10-025Medical Research Council MR/S014357/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceProbabilityTreatment OutcomeCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansProportional Hazards ModelsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTechnology Assessment, Biomedicalcausal inferencecost-effectiveness analysismedication nonadherencenoncompliancesurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID31646932
PMCPMC6900590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.