Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36737675›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2024

Phases of methodological research in biostatistics-Building the evidence base for new methods.

Georg Heinze, Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Michael Kammer, Tim P Morris, Ian R White, Simulation Panel of the STRATOS initiative

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. A Framework for the Estimation of Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Using Joint Models of Longitudinal and Survival Data.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Georg HeinzeCenter for Medical Data Science, Institute of Clinical Biometrics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-1147-8491
Anne-Laure BoulesteixInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2729-0947
Michael KammerCenter for Medical Data Science, Institute of Clinical Biometrics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Tim P MorrisMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5850-3610
Ian R WhiteMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Simulation Panel of the STRATOS initiative

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although new biostatistical methods are published at a very high rate, many of these developments are not trustworthy enough to be adopted by the scientific community. We propose a framework to think about how a piece of methodological work contributes to the evidence base for a method. Similar to the well-known phases of clinical research in drug development, we propose to define four phases of methodological research. These four phases cover (I) proposing a new methodological idea while providing, for example, logical reasoning or proofs, (II) providing empirical evidence, first in a narrow target setting, then (III) in an extended range of settings and for various outcomes, accompanied by appropriate application examples, and (IV) investigations that establish a method as sufficiently well-understood to know when it is preferred over others and when it is not; that is, its pitfalls. We suggest basic definitions of the four phases to provoke thought and discussion rather than devising an unambiguous classification of studies into phases. Too many methodological developments finish before phase III/IV, but we give two examples with references. Our concept rebalances the emphasis to studies in phases III and IV, that is, carefully planned method comparison studies and studies that explore the empirical properties of existing methods in a wider range of problems.

Indexed as

BiostatisticsResearch Designbiostatisticsmethodological researchreproducibility

Identifiers

PMID36737675
PMCPMC7615508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.