Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35081912›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical research methodology2022

Unifying the analysis of continuous and categorical measures of weight loss and incorporating group effect: a secondary re-analysis of a large cluster randomized clinical trial using Bayesian approach.

Fengming Tang, Christie A Befort, Jo Wick, Byron J Gajewski

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02456636 (Rural Engagement in Primary Care for Optimizing Weight Reduction), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02456636 nacompletednot on this map

Rural Engagement in Primary Care for Optimizing Weight Reduction (RE-POWER)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Kansas Medical CenterRan2016 to 2019Enrolled1,432ConditionsObesityArmsFee-for-Service Model (FFS, In clinic individual visits), Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH, In clinic group visits), Disease Management (DM, Phone group visits)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
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

4 authors.

Fengming TangDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Mail Stop 1026, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA. tang_fengming@yahoo.com.
Christie A BefortDepartment of Population Health, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Jo WickDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Mail Stop 1026, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Byron J GajewskiDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Mail Stop 1026, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough frequentist paradigm has been the predominant approach to clinical studies for decades, some limitations associated with the frequentist null hypothesis significance testing have been recognized. Bayesian approaches can provide additional insights into data interpretation and inference by deriving posterior distributions of model parameters reflecting the clinical interest. In this article, we sought to demonstrate how Bayesian approaches can improve the data interpretation by reanalyzing the Rural Engagement in Primary Care for Optimizing Weight Reduction (REPOWER).

methodsREPOWER is a cluster randomized clinical trial comparing three care delivery models: in-clinic individual visits, in-clinic group visits, and phone-based group visits. The primary endpoint was weight loss at 24 months and the secondary endpoints included the proportions of achieving 5 and 10% weight loss at 24 months. We reanalyzed the data using a three-level Bayesian hierarchical model. The posterior distributions of weight loss at 24 months for each arm were obtained using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. We then estimated the probability of having a higher weight loss and the probability of having greater proportion achieving 5 and 10% weight loss between groups. Additionally, a four-level hierarchical model was used to assess the partially nested intervention group effect which was not investigated in the original REPOWER analyses.

resultsThe Bayesian analyses estimated 99.5% probability that in-clinic group visits, compared with in-clinic individual visits, resulted in a higher percent weight loss (posterior mean difference: 1.8%[95% CrI: 0.5,3.2%]), a greater probability of achieving 5% threshold (posterior mean difference: 9.2% [95% CrI: 2.4, 16.0%]) and 10% threshold (posterior mean difference: 6.6% [95% CrI: 1.7, 11.5%]). The phone-based group visits had similar result. We also concluded that including intervention group did not impact model fit significantly.

conclusionsWe unified the analyses of continuous (the primary endpoint) and categorical measures (the secondary endpoints) of weight loss with one single Bayesian hierarchical model. This approach gained statistical power for the dichotomized endpoints by leveraging the information in the continuous data. Furthermore, the Bayesian analysis enabled additional insights into data interpretation and inference by providing posterior distributions for parameters of interest and posterior probabilities of different hypotheses that were not available with the frequentist approach.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02456636 ; date of registry: May 28, 2015.

Indexed as

TelephoneWeight LossBayes TheoremHumansProbabilityResearch DesignBayesian paradigmHierarchical modelRandomized clinical trial

Identifiers

PMID35081912
PMCPMC8790853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.