Assessing Clinical Outcomes in a Data-Rich World-A Reality Check on Real-World Data.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Is propensity score matching still a valid design choice for surgical comparative effectiveness research?The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026
   Article
2. Intracranial and Extracranial Progression and Their Correlation With Overall Survival After Stereotactic Radiosurgery in a Multi-institutional Cohort With Brain Metastases.JAMA network open · 2023
   Article
3. Data Integration Challenges for Machine Learning in Precision Medicine.Frontiers in medicine · 2021
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Correlation Between Surrogate End Points and Overall Survival in a Multi-institutional Clinicogenomic Cohort of Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung or Colorectal Cancer.2021

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.