Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32041653›Full record

ArticleTrials2020

Machine learning analysis plans for randomised controlled trials: detecting treatment effect heterogeneity with strict control of type I error.

James A Watson, Chris C Holmes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A Machine-Learning Approach for Estimating Subgroup- and Individual-Level Treatment Effects: An Illustration Using the 65 Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

James A WatsonMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Rajvithi Road, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand. jwatowatson@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5524-0325
Chris C HolmesNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6667-4943
Mahidol University · THUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UP_A390_1107
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetrospective exploratory analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) seeking to identify treatment effect heterogeneity (TEH) are prone to bias and false positives. Yet the desire to learn all we can from exhaustive data measurements on trial participants motivates the inclusion of such analyses within RCTs. Moreover, widespread advances in machine learning (ML) methods hold potential to utilise such data to identify subjects exhibiting heterogeneous treatment response.

methodsWe present a novel analysis strategy for detecting TEH in randomised data using ML methods, whilst ensuring proper control of the false positive discovery rate. Our approach uses random data partitioning with statistical or ML-based prediction on held-out data. This method can test for both crossover TEH (switch in optimal treatment) and non-crossover TEH (systematic variation in benefit across patients). The former is done via a two-sample hypothesis test measuring overall predictive performance. The latter is done via 'stacking' the ML predictors alongside a classical statistical model to formally test the added benefit of the ML algorithm. An adaptation of recent statistical theory allows for the construction of a valid aggregate p value. This testing strategy is independent of the choice of ML method.

resultsWe demonstrate our approach with a re-analysis of the SEAQUAMAT trial, which compared quinine to artesunate for the treatment of severe malaria in Asian adults. We find no evidence for any subgroup who would benefit from a change in treatment from the current standard of care, artesunate, but strong evidence for significant TEH within the artesunate treatment group. In particular, we find that artesunate provides a differential benefit to patients with high numbers of circulating ring stage parasites.

conclusionsML analysis plans using computational notebooks (documents linked to a programming language that capture the model parameter settings, data processing choices, and evaluation criteria) along with version control can improve the robustness and transparency of RCT exploratory analyses. A data-partitioning algorithm allows researchers to apply the latest ML techniques safe in the knowledge that any declared associations are statistically significant at a user-defined level.

Indexed as

Machine LearningRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdultAlgorithmsAntimalarialsArtesunateAsiaHumansMalaria, FalciparumPlasmodium falciparumQuinineRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAntimalarialsArtesunateQuinineHeterogeneous treatment effectsMachine learningRandomised trialsSubgroup statistical analysis plan

Identifiers

PMID32041653
PMCPMC7011561
OpenAlexW3006751454

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.