Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36876989›Full record

Trial reportJournal of biopharmaceutical statistics2023

Practical guidance on modeling choices for the virtual twins method.

Chuyu Deng, Jack M Wolf, David M Vock, Dana M Carroll, Jeffrey A Boatman, Dorothy K Hatsukami, Ning Leng, Joseph S Koopmeiners

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics, 2023. 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, top 99% of its field
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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chuyu DengDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jack M WolfDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
David M VockDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Dana M CarrollDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jeffrey A BoatmanDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Dorothy K HatsukamiMasonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Ning LengProduct Development Data Sciences, Genentech, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Joseph S KoopmeinersDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

VERY LOW NICOTINE CIGARETTES IN SMOKERS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIAU54DA031659 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI LE, CHAP T. · 2011 to 2022
$64.7M
University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
Innovative Statistical Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Tobacco Product StandardsR01DA046320 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI Joseph S. Koopmeiners, David M. Vock · 2018 to 2026
$2.4M
SMART-ACT: Spatial Methodologic Approaches for Risk Assessment and Therapeutic Adaptation in Cancer TreatmentR01CA214825 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI CANAHUATE, GUADALUPE, FULLER, CLIFTON DAVID · 2017 to 2019
$1.1M
QuBBD: Precision E –Radiomics for Dynamic Big Head & Neck Cancer Data R01CA225190 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI CANAHUATE, GUADALUPE, FULLER, CLIFTON DAVID · 2017 to 2019
$776k
Innovative Statistical Methods for Detecting and Accounting for Non-Compliance in Randomized Trials of Very Low Nicotine Content CigarettesR03DA041870 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI KOOPMEINERS, JOSEPH S., VOCK, DAVID M. · 2016 to 2017
$229k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NCI NIH HHS R01 CA214825NCI NIH HHS R01 CA225190NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA046320NIDA NIH HHS R03 DA041870NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA031659
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals can vary drastically in their response to the same treatment, and this heterogeneity has driven the push for more personalized medicine. Accurate and interpretable methods to identify subgroups that respond to the treatment differently from the population average are necessary to achieving this goal. The Virtual Twins (VT) method is a highly cited and implemented method for subgroup identification because of its intuitive framework. However, since its initial publication, many researchers still rely heavily on the authors' initial modeling suggestions without examining newer and more powerful alternatives. This leaves much of the potential of the method untapped. We comprehensively evaluate the performance of VT with different combinations of methods in each of its component steps, under a collection of linear and nonlinear problem settings. Our simulations show that the method choice for Step 1 of VT, in which dense models with high predictive performance are fit for the potential outcomes, is highly influential in the overall accuracy of the method, and Superlearner is a promising choice. We illustrate our findings by using VT to identify subgroups with heterogeneous treatment effects in a randomized, double-blind trial of very low nicotine content cigarettes.

Indexed as

Precision MedicineDouble-Blind MethodHumanscausal inferencemachine learningpersonalized medicineprecision medicineVirtual twins

Identifiers

PMID36876989
PMCPMC10480344
OpenAlexW4226284251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.