ArticleHarvard data science review2022
Accommodating Serial Correlation and Sequential Design Elements in Personalized Studies and Aggregated Personalized Studies.
Article in Harvard data science review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of statistical methods in R for estimating intervention effects using segmented linear regression in the AB interrupted time series design.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Randomized Personalized Trial for Stress Management Compared to Standard of Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- From precision interventions to precision health.Nature communications · 2025Review
- Defining Biological Variability, Analytical Precision and Quantitative Biophysiochemical Characterization of Human Urinary Extracellular Vesicles.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2025Article
- Exploratory analysis of the variable response to an intensive lifestyle change program for metabolic syndrome.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Exploring human biology with N-of-1 clinical trials.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023Article
- Does Modulation of an Epigenetic Clock Define a Geroprotector?Advances in geriatric medicine and research · 2022Article
- Introducing Data Sciences to N-of-1 Designs, Statistics, Use-Cases, the Future, and the Moniker 'N-of-1' Trial.Harvard data science review · 2022Article
- The Family of Single-Case Experimental Designs.Harvard data science review · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Single subject, or 'N-of-1,' studies are receiving a great deal of attention from both theoretical and applied researchers. This is consistent with the growing acceptance of 'personalized' approaches to health care and the need to prove that personalized interventions tailored to an individual's likely unique physiological profile and other characteristics work as they should. In fact, the preferred way of referring to N-of-1 studies in contemporary settings is as 'personalized studies.' Designing efficient personalized studies and analyzing data from them in ways that ensure statistically valid inferences are not trivial, however. I briefly discuss some of the more complex issues surrounding the design and analysis of personalized studies, such as the use of washout periods, the frequency with which measures associated with the efficacy of an intervention are collected during a study, and the serious effect that serial correlation can have on the analysis and interpretation of personalized study data and results if not accounted for explicitly. I point out that more efficient sequential designs for personalized and aggregated personalized studies can be developed, and I explore the properties of sequential personalized studies in a few settings via simulation studies. Finally, I comment on contexts within which personalized studies will likely be pursued in the future.
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.