Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2023
Using modified intention-to-treat as a principal stratum estimator for failure to initiate treatment.
Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- User engagement in clinical trials of digital mental health interventions: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Pooled it
- Choice of Growth Standard and Interpretation of Large for Gestational Age Outcomes: Evidence From the CDC4G Trial.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2026Trial
- Conventional vs Video-Assisted Laryngoscopy for Perioperative Endotracheal Intubations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Long-Term Effectiveness of Unguided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Major Depressive Disorder in Chinese Adults: Randomized Controlled Trial With a 12-Month Follow-Up.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Elraglusib and chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a randomized controlled phase 2 trial.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- One-Year Weight Loss Following a Remote Culinary Medicine Program: A Bi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2026Trial
- Timing of Re-Evaluation After Periodontal Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of periodontal research · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Mobile App-Based Metamemory Cognitive Training for Mild Cognitive Impairment: Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Feasibility and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Mobile App-Based Personalized Exercise Program in Older Patients With Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Trial
- Acceptance and commitment therapy- based intervention to improve psychological skills and resilience in surgical trainees: a randomised waitlist-controlled trial.BMC surgery · 2025Trial
- Changing diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes (CDC4G) in Sweden: A stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.PLoS medicine · 2024Trial
- A school-level randomized preliminary study of in-classroom physical activity breaks among fifth graders.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026Article
- A secondary analysis investigating therapist-effects in a guided internet-based intervention for adults with symptoms of depression.Internet interventions · 2026Article
- Iodine-Impregnated Adhesive Film Enhances Dressing Integrity and Patient Satisfaction After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Defining estimands in anaesthesia clinical trials: a scoping review and framework.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Article
- Bovine colostrum as a human milk fortifier for very preterm infants with slow feeding advancement: a randomized controlled trial.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Hospital waterbirth for low-risk birthing people: findings of a randomized controlled trial.AJOG global reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Review
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA common intercurrent event affecting many trials is when some participants do not begin their assigned treatment. For example, in a double-blind drug trial, some participants may not receive any dose of study medication. Many trials use a 'modified intention-to-treat' approach, whereby participants who do not initiate treatment are excluded from the analysis. However, it is not clear (a) the estimand being targeted by such an approach and (b) the assumptions necessary for such an approach to be unbiased.
methodsUsing potential outcome notation, we demonstrate that a modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment is estimating a
resultsWe identify two key criteria in determining whether the modified intention-to-treat estimator is likely to be unbiased: first, we must be able to measure the participants in each treatment arm who experience the intercurrent event, and second, the assumption that treatment allocation will not affect whether the participant begins treatment must be reasonable. Most double-blind trials will satisfy these criteria, as the decision to start treatment cannot be influenced by the allocation, and we provide an example of an open-label trial where these criteria are likely to be satisfied as well, implying that a modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment is an unbiased estimator for the principal stratum effect in these settings. We also give two examples where these criteria will not be satisfied (one comparing an active intervention vs usual care, where we cannot identify which usual care participants would have initiated the active intervention, and another comparing two active interventions in an unblinded manner, where knowledge of the assigned treatment arm may affect the participant's choice to begin or not), implying that a modified intention-to-treat estimator will be biased in these settings.
conclusionA modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment can be an unbiased estimator for the principal stratum estimand. Our framework can help identify when the assumptions for unbiasedness are likely to hold, and thus whether modified intention-to-treat is appropriate or not.
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.