ArticleStatistics and its interface2021
Extracting scalar measures from functional data with applications to placebo response.
Article in Statistics and its interface, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05480228 (EPPIC-Net EN21-01 A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of 80 mg Daily of NRD135S.E1 Versus Placebo in Adult and Elderly Participants With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
EPPIC-Net EN21-01 A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of 80 mg Daily of NRD135S.E1 Versus Placebo in Adult and Elderly Participants With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In controlled and observational studies, outcome measures are often observed longitudinally. Such data are difficult to compare among units directly because there is no natural ordering of curves. This is relevant not only in clinical trials, where typically the goal is to evaluate the relative efficacy of treatments on average, but also in the growing and increasingly important area of personalized medicine, where treatment decisions are optimized with respect to a relevant patient outcome. In personalized medicine, there are no methods for optimizing treatment decision rules using longitudinal outcomes, e.g., symptom trajectories, because of the lack of a natural ordering of curves. A typical practice is to summarize the longitudinal response by a scalar outcome that can then be compared across patients, treatments, etc. We describe some of the summaries that are in common use, especially in clinical trials. We consider a general summary measure (weighted average tangent slope) with weights that can be chosen to optimize specific inference depending on the application. We illustrate the methodology on a study of depression treatment, in which it is difficult to separate placebo effects from the specific effects of the antidepressant. We argue that this approach provides a better summary for estimating the benefits of an active treatment than traditional non-weighted averages.
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.