ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Clarifying Causal Effects of Interest and Underlying Assumptions in Randomized and Nonrandomized Clinical Trials in Oncology Using Directed Acyclic Graphs and Single-World Intervention Graphs.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent clinical trials in oncology have used increasingly complex methodologies, such as causal inference methods for intercurrent events, external control, and covariate adjustment, posing challenges in clarifying the estimand and underlying assumptions. This article proposes expressing causal structures using graphical tools-directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and single-world intervention graphs (SWIGs)-in the planning phase of a clinical trial. It presents five rules for selecting a sufficient set of adjustment variables on the basis of a diagram representing the clinical trial, along with three case studies of randomized and single-arm trials and a brief tutorial on DAG and SWIG. Through the case studies, DAGs appear effective in clarifying assumptions for identifying causal effects, although SWIGs should complement DAGs due to their limitations in the presence of intercurrent events in oncology research.
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.