Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35472818›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2022

The number needed to treat adjusted for explanatory variables in regression and survival analysis: Theory and application.

Valentin Vancak, Yair Goldberg, Stephen Z Levine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Valentin VancakDepartment of Statistics, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-8732-7353
Yair GoldbergFaculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Technion - Israel institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
Stephen Z LevineDepartment of Community Mental Health, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number needed to treat (NNT) is an efficacy index commonly used in randomized clinical trials. The NNT is the average number of treated patients for each undesirable patient outcome, for example, death, prevented by the treatment. We introduce a systematic theoretically-based framework to model and estimate the conditional and the harmonic mean NNT in the presence of explanatory variables, in various models with dichotomous and nondichotomous outcomes. The conditional NNT is illustrated in a series of four primary examples; logistic regression, linear regression, Kaplan-Meier estimation, and Cox regression models. Also, we establish and prove mathematically the exact relationship between the conditional and the harmonic mean NNT in the presence of explanatory variables. We introduce four different methods to calculate asymptotically-correct confidence intervals for both indices. Finally, we implemented a simulation study to provide numerical demonstrations of the aforementioned theoretical results and the four examples. Numerical analysis showed that the parametric estimators of the NNT with nonparametric bootstrap-based confidence intervals outperformed other examined combinations in most settings. An R package and a web application have been developed and made available online to calculate the conditional and the harmonic mean NNTs with their corresponding confidence intervals.

Indexed as

Proportional Hazards ModelsHumansLogistic Modelsadjusted NNTconditional NNTharmonic NNTNNTthe cox model

Identifiers

PMID35472818
PMCPMC9540555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.