Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40404180›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

M-Learning for Individual Treatment Rule With Survival Outcomes.

Zhizhen Zhao, Ai Ni, Xinyi Xu, Macarius Donneyong, Bo Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Zhizhen ZhaoDepartment of Statistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Ai NiDivision of Biostatistics, College of Public Health The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3002-3556
Xinyi XuDepartment of Statistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Macarius DonneyongDivision of Outcomes and Translational Sciences, College of Pharmacy The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Bo LuDivision of Biostatistics, College of Public Health The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3807-7869

Funding

Poly-Matching Causal Inference for Assessing Multiple Acute Medical Managements of Pediatric Traumatic Brain InjuriesR01HD107280 · NICHD · RESEARCH INST NATIONWIDE CHILDREN'S HOSP · PI Jonathan Groner, Bo Lu · 2023 to 2026
$2.2M
Matched Design with Sensitivity Analysis for Observational Survival Data in Cardiovascular Patient Management using EMR DataR21HL170212 · NHLBI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI LU, BO · 2023 to 2024
$231k
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 1R01HD107280National Science Foundation DMS-2015552NHLBI NIH HHS 1R21HL170212NHLBI NIH HHS R21 HL170212NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD107280
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individualized treatment rules (ITRs) tailor treatments to individuals based on their unique characteristics to optimize clinical outcomes and resource allocation. Current approaches use outcome modeling or propensity score weighting to control confounding in complex medical data. To avoid model misspecification and the impact of extreme weights, matched-learning (M-learning) was recently proposed for continuous outcomes. In this paper, we expand the existing M-learning methodology to estimate optimal ITRs under right-censored data, as time-to-event outcomes are common in medical research. We construct matched sets for individuals by comparing observed times and incorporate an inverse probability censoring weight into the value function to handle censored observations. Additionally, we consider a full matching design as a possible alternative to the matching with replacement in M-learning. We demonstrate that the proposed value function is unbiased for the true value function without censoring. To gain insight into the empirical performance, we conduct an extensive simulation study that compares M-learning with two matching designs and a weighed learning approach. Results are evaluated based on winning probabilities and estimated values. The simulation reveals that all methods are generally fine in the absence of unmeasured confounders, and different methods show somewhat different performances under various scenarios. But their performance drops substantially in the presence of unmeasured confounders. Finally, we apply these methods to estimate optimal ITRs for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) complications from an electronic medical record database, where full matching design shows slightly better performance.

Indexed as

Precision MedicineComputer SimulationHumansModels, StatisticalPropensity ScoreSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcomecensored datafull matchingindividualized treatment rulematched‐learningpersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID40404180
PMCPMC12097882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.