ArticleCell reports. Medicine2025
Estimating the treatment effects of multiple drug combinations on multiple outcomes in hypertension.
Article in Cell reports. Medicine, 2025. 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.
- Synthesis and Combination Studies of Novel Dipeptide Nitriles with Curcumin for a Potent Synergistic Action Against Rhodesain, Cysteine Protease ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Hypertension management is complex due to the need for multiple drug combinations and consideration of diverse outcomes. Traditional treatment effect estimation methods struggle to address this complexity, as they typically focus on binary treatments and binary outcomes. To overcome these challenges, we introduce a framework that accommodates multiple drug combinations and multiple outcomes (METO). METO uses multi-treatment encoding to handle drug combinations and sequences, distinguishing between effectiveness and safety outcomes by learning the outcome type during prediction. To mitigate confounding bias, METO employs an inverse probability weighting method for multiple treatments, assigning balance weights based on propensity scores. Evaluated on real-world data, METO achieves significant performance improvements over existing methods, with an average improvement of 6.4% in influence function-based precision of estimating heterogeneous effects. A case study demonstrates METO's ability to identify personalized antihypertensive treatments that optimize efficacy and minimize safety risks, highlighting its potential for improving hypertension treatment strategies.
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.