ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2023
Randomizing a clinical trial in neuro-degenerative disease.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
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 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper studies randomization rules for a sequential two-treatment, two-site clinical trial in Parkinson's disease. An important feature is that we have values of responses and five potential prognostic factors from a sample of 144 patients similar to those to be enrolled in the trial. Analysis of this sample provides a model for trial analysis. The comparison of allocation rules is made by simulation yielding measures of loss due to imbalance and of potential bias. A major novelty of the paper is the use of this sample, via a two-stage algorithm, to provide an empirical distribution of covariates for the simulation; sampling of a correlated multivariate normal distribution is followed by transformation to variables following the empirical marginal distributions. Six allocation rules are evaluated. The paper concludes with some comments on general aspects of the evaluation of such rules and provides a recommendation for two allocation rules, one for each site, depending on the target number of patients to be enrolled.
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.