ArticleData in brief2020
Using preliminary data and prospective power analyses for mid-stream revision of projected group and subgroup sizes in pragmatic patient-centered outcomes research.
Article in Data in brief, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02957513 (Improving Self-Care Decisions of Medically Underserved African-Americans With Uncontrolled Diabetes), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Improving Self-Care Decisions of Medically Underserved African-Americans With Uncontrolled Diabetes: Effectiveness of Patient-Driven Text Messaging Versus Health Coaching
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pragmatic clinical trials are commonly used in patient-centered outcomes research to assess heterogeneity of treatment effects. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) methodology standards for assessing heterogeneity of treatment effects are extremely rigorous, but their implementation in real-world settings can be difficult. Predicting recruitment effectiveness and subgroup characteristics is often challenging and may require mid-stream revision of projected group and subgroup sizes. Yet, little real-world data are available to demonstrate methodologically valid approaches to address situations where such revisions are necessary. These data were used for mid-stream revision of group and subgroup sizes in the Management of Diabetes in Everyday Life (MODEL) clinical trial. The planned number of randomized participants retained over the one-year study period was reduced from 800 to 581 due to recruitment difficulties among potential participants residing in rural areas. Prospective power analyses are based on the revised target of 581 participants retained and the proportions of 167 participants with various key baseline characteristics, who had been randomized in MODEL by January 2018, as reported to the Patient Center Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) and the MODEL Data Safety and Monitoring Committee. Power calculations are based on two-sided t-tests with type-I error rates of 0.05 and the assumption that effect sizes will range from small (standardized difference = 0.36) to medium (= 0.50). The primary outcome variables are how many days in the previous week participants 1) ate healthy meals, 2) participated in at least 30 minutes of physical activity, and 3) took medications as prescribed. The POWER procedure of SAS 9.4 was used for all analyses. These data, along with the approach, can assist statisticians as they plan future pragmatic clinical trials evaluating heterogeneity of treatment effects. These data can help inform investigators, conducting patient-centered outcomes research, as they define subgroups for either confirmatory analyses for testing heterogeneity of treatment effects or for exploratory analyses where estimation of confidence bounds may be useful for generating future hypotheses. (This work was supported through a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Project Program Award (SC15-1503-28336), www.ClinicalTrials.gov and Identifier: NCT02957513 [1].).
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.