Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37005003›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2023

Online error rate control for platform trials.

David S Robertson, James M S Wason, Franz König, Martin Posch, Thomas Jaki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Asymptotic online FWER control for dependent test statistics.Statistical methods in medical research · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. ADDIS-Graphs for Online Error Control With Application to Platform Trials.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Online multiple hypothesis testing.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

David S RobertsonMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6207-0416
James M S WasonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4691-126X
Franz KönigSection of Medical Statistics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6893-3304
Martin PoschSection of Medical Statistics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8499-8573
Thomas JakiMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1096-188X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Platform trials evaluate multiple experimental treatments under a single master protocol, where new treatment arms are added to the trial over time. Given the multiple treatment comparisons, there is the potential for inflation of the overall type I error rate, which is complicated by the fact that the hypotheses are tested at different times and are not necessarily pre-specified. Online error rate control methodology provides a possible solution to the problem of multiplicity for platform trials where a relatively large number of hypotheses are expected to be tested over time. In the online multiple hypothesis testing framework, hypotheses are tested one-by-one over time, where at each time-step an analyst decides whether to reject the current null hypothesis without knowledge of future tests but based solely on past decisions. Methodology has recently been developed for online control of the false discovery rate as well as the familywise error rate (FWER). In this article, we describe how to apply online error rate control to the platform trial setting, present extensive simulation results, and give some recommendations for the use of this new methodology in practice. We show that the algorithms for online error rate control can have a substantially lower FWER than uncorrected testing, while still achieving noticeable gains in power when compared with the use of a Bonferroni correction. We also illustrate how online error rate control would have impacted a currently ongoing platform trial.

Indexed as

Research DesignAdaptive Clinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansmultiple testingonline hypothesis testingplatform trialtype I error rate

Identifiers

PMID37005003
PMCPMC7614610

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.