ArticleStatistics in medicine2021
Fusion designs and estimators for treatment effects.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- HIV Prevention Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Tenofovir Alafenamide Combination Preexposure Prophylaxis Versus Placebo.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Trial
- Combining Observational Studies to Reduce Multiple Biases.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- An Introduction to Longitudinal Synthetic Cohorts for Studying the Life Course Drivers of Health Outcomes and Inequalities in Older Age.Current epidemiology reports · 2025Article
- Comparing existing and novel methods for estimating etiology-specific diarrheal disease incidence in hybrid surveillance studies.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Bridged treatment comparisons: an illustrative application in HIV treatment.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Overcoming Data Gaps in Life Course Epidemiology by Matching Across Cohorts.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Fusing trial data for treatment comparisons: Single vs multi-span bridging.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Illustration of 2 Fusion Designs and Estimators.American journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Case study of semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes: An application of the CJournal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Review
- Impervious to Randomness: Confounding and Selection Biases in Randomized Clinical Trials.Cancer investigation · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While randomized trials remain the best evidence for treatment effectiveness, lack of generalizability often remains an important concern. Additionally, when new treatments are compared against existing standards of care, the potentially small benefit of the new treatment may be difficult to detect in a trial without extremely large sample sizes and long follow-up times. Recent advances in "data fusion" provide a framework to combine results across studies that are applicable to a given population of interest and allow treatment comparisons that may not be feasible with traditional study designs. We propose a data fusion-based estimator that can be used to combine information from two studies: (1) a study comparing a new treatment to the standard of care in the local population of interest, and (2) a study comparing the standard of care to placebo in a separate, distal population. We provide conditions under which the parameter of interest can be identified from the two studies described and explore properties of the estimator through simulation. Finally, we apply the estimator to estimate the effect of triple- vs monotherapy for the treatment of HIV using data from two randomized trials. The proposed estimator can account for underlying population structures that induce differences in case mix, adherence, and outcome prevalence between the local and distal populations, and the estimator can also account for potentially informative loss to follow-up. Approaches like those detailed here are increasingly important to speed the approval and adoption of effective new therapies by leveraging multiple sources of information.
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.