ArticleEpilepsia2023
Quantifying and controlling the impact of regression to the mean on randomized controlled trials in epilepsy.
Article in Epilepsia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Counterintuitive: reducing regression-to-the-mean worsens efficiency in simulated clinical trials.Seizure · 2026Article
- Patterns of seizure frequency reduction in clinical trial participants with lower baseline seizure frequency.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Does Missing Medication Acutely Change Seizure Risk? A Prospective Study.Annals of neurology · 2026Article
- L-Relationship between uncertainty and average seizure frequency in clinical trials of antiseizure medications.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Article
- Epilepsy and Placebo: A Literature Review.Neurologic clinics · 2026Review
- Blueprint for clinical N-of-1 strategies with off-label precision treatments in monogenic epilepsies.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Review
- Inductive reasoning with large language models: A simulated randomized controlled trial for epilepsy.Epilepsy research · 2025Article
- Factors associated with placebo response rate in randomized controlled trials of antiseizure medications for focal epilepsy.Epilepsia · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Overview of the Current Status and Advancements in Various Treatment Strategies against Epilepsy.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2024Review
- Review
- Inductive reasoning with large language models: a simulated randomized controlled trial for epilepsy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- The present and future of seizure detection, prediction, and forecasting with machine learning, including the future impact on clinical trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- The Blind Leading the Uncontrolled: How Does Seizure Frequency Improve Over Time in Drug-Resistant Epilepsy?Epilepsy currentsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) in epilepsy for drug treatments are plagued by high costs. One potential remedy is to reduce placebo response via better control over regression to the mean (RTM). Here, RTM represents an initial observed seizure rate higher than the long-term average, which gradually settles closer to the average, resulting in apparent response to treatment. This study used simulation to clarify the relationship between eligibility criteria and RTM.
methodsUsing a statistically realistic seizure diary simulator, the impact of RTM on placebo response and trial efficacy was explored by varying eligibility criteria for a traditional treatment phase II/III RCT for drug-resistant epilepsy.
resultsWhen the baseline period was included in the eligibility criteria, increasingly larger fractions of RTM were observed (25%-47% vs. 23%-25%). Higher fractions of RTM corresponded with higher expected placebo responses (50% responder rate [RR50]: 2%-9% vs. 0%-8%) and lower statistical efficacy (RR50: 47%-67% vs. 47%-81%). The exclusion of baseline from eligibility criteria was shown to decrease the number of patients needed by roughly 30%. SIGNIFICANCE: The manipulation of eligibility criteria for RCTs has a predictable and important impact on RTM, and therefore on placebo response; the difference between drug and placebo was more easily detected. This in turn impacts trial efficacy and therefore cost. This study found dramatic improvements in efficacy and cost when baseline was not included in eligibility.
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.