ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
Negative Control Outcome Adjustment in Early-Phase Randomized Trials: Estimating Vaccine Effects on Immune Responses in HIV Exposed Uninfected Infants.
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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adjustment for prognostic baseline variables can reduce bias due to covariate imbalance and increase efficiency in randomized trials. While the use of covariate adjustment in late-phase trials is justified by favorable large-sample properties, it is seldom used in small, early-phase studies, due to uncertainty in which variables are prognostic and the potential for precision loss, type I error rate inflation, and undercoverage of confidence intervals. To address this problem, we consider adjustment for a valid negative control outcome (NCO), or an auxiliary post-randomization outcome believed to be completely unaffected by treatment but more highly correlated with the primary outcome than baseline covariates. We articulate the assumptions that permit adjustment for NCOs without producing post-randomization selection bias, and describe plausible data-generating models where NCO adjustment can improve upon adjustment for baseline covariates alone. In numerical experiments, we illustrate performance and provide practical recommendations regarding model selection and finite-sample variance corrections. We apply our methods to the reanalysis of two early-phase vaccine trials in HIV exposed uninfected (HEU) infants, where we demonstrate that adjustment for auxiliary post-baseline immunological parameters can enhance the precision of vaccine effect estimates relative to standard approaches that avoid adjustment or adjust for baseline covariates alone.
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.