ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2025
Sensitivity analysis for the probability of benefit in randomized controlled trials with a binary treatment and a binary outcome.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2025. 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
Abstract
For a comprehensive understanding of the effect of a given treatment on an outcome of interest, quantification of individual treatment heterogeneity is essential, alongside estimation of the average causal effect. However, even in randomized controlled trials, quantities such as the probability of benefit or the probability of harm are not identifiable, since multiple potential outcomes cannot be observed simultaneously for the same individual. We propose a sensitivity analysis for the probability of benefit in randomized controlled trial settings with a binary treatment and a binary outcome, by quantifying the deviation from conditional independence of the two potential outcomes, given a set of measured prognostic baseline covariates. We do this using a marginal sensitivity analysis parameter that does not depend on the number or complexity of the measured covariates. We provide a guide to estimation and interpretation, and illustrate our method in simulations, as well as using a real data example from a randomized controlled trial studying the effect of umbilical vein oxytocin administration on the need for manual removal of the placenta during birth.
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.