Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39319446›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2024

Testing for a treatment effect in a selected subgroup.

Nigel Stallard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Nigel StallardWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7781-1512

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a growing interest in clinical trials that investigate how patients may respond differently to an experimental treatment depending on the basis of some biomarker measured on a continuous scale, and in particular to identify some threshold value for the biomarker above which a positive treatment effect can be considered to have been demonstrated. This can be statistically challenging when the same data are used both to select the threshold and to test the treatment effect in the subpopulation that it defines. This paper describes a hierarchical testing framework to give familywise type I error rate control in this setting and proposes two specific tests that can be used within this framework. One, a simple test based on the estimated value from a linear regression model with treatment by biomarker interaction, is powerful but can lead to type I error rate inflation if the assumptions of the linear model are not met. The other is more robust to these assumptions, but can be slightly less powerful when the assumptions hold.

Indexed as

BiomarkersClinical Trials as TopicHumansLinear ModelsModels, StatisticalTreatment OutcomeBiomarkersAdaptive enrichment designfamily wise error rate controlhierarchical testinglinear regressionsubgroup selection

Identifiers

PMID39319446
PMCPMC11577705

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.