Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40105204›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2025

A New Frequentist Implementation of the Daniels and Hughes Bivariate Meta-Analysis Model for Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation.

Dan Jackson, Michael Sweeting, Robbie C M van Aert, Sylwia Bujkiewicz, Keith R Abrams, Wolfgang Viechtbauer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Translating treatment effects between correlated endpoints.BMC medical research methodology · 2026
    Article
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

6 authors.

Dan JacksonStatistical Innovation Group, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4963-8123
Michael SweetingStatistical Innovation Group, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Robbie C M van AertTilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
Sylwia BujkiewiczBiostatistics Research Group, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Keith R AbramsDepartment of Statistics and Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Wolfgang ViechtbauerMaastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surrogate endpoints are used when the primary outcome is difficult to measure accurately. Determining if a measure is suitable to use as a surrogate endpoint is a challenging task and a variety of meta-analysis models have been proposed for this purpose. The Daniels and Hughes bivariate model for trial-level surrogate endpoint evaluation is gaining traction but presents difficulties for frequentist estimation and hitherto only Bayesian solutions have been available. This is because the marginal model is not a conventional linear model and the number of unknown parameters increases at the same rate as the number of studies. This second property raises immediate concerns that the maximum likelihood estimator of the model's unknown variance component may be downwardly biased. We derive maximum likelihood estimating equations to motivate a bias adjusted estimator of this parameter. The bias correction terms in our proposed estimating equation are easily computed and have an intuitively appealing algebraic form. A simulation study is performed to illustrate how this estimator overcomes the difficulties associated with maximum likelihood estimation. We illustrate our methods using two contrasting examples from oncology.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBiometryEndpoint DeterminationMeta-Analysis as TopicModels, StatisticalBayes TheoremHumansLikelihood FunctionsBiomarkersbias correctionmaximum likelihood estimationmeta‐regressionmultivariate meta‐analysissurrogate endpoint

Identifiers

PMID40105204
PMCPMC11921291

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.