ArticleTrials2025
REVERSE model: a novel approach in medical research.
Article in Trials, 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.
- Old Drugs, New Opportunities: Advancing Cancer Care Through Repurposing.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRandomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard but they are limited by high costs and external validity. The REVERSE model is introduced to address these challenges.
methodsThe REVERSE model encompasses two sequential phases. First, in the data mining phase, compatible datasets are identified and merged by using matching or stricter inclusion/exclusion criteria, thereby reducing selection bias. Second, a randomization phase addresses the inherent biases of the selected datasets. For a dichotomous scenario, the data are organized into four sub-cohorts according to the concordance with the original and new assignments: two concordant and two non-concordant. New decision factors are tested in concordant groups. Patients in non-concordant cohorts were excluded. ROMICAT-II was used to reproduce the findings from both the ROMICAT-II and ROMICAT-I trials, with results reported as the median of 10,000 applications.
findingsThe REVERSE model successfully replicated the results of ROMICAT-II and ROMICAT-I using only ROMICAT-II data. For ROMICAT-II, the median (interquartile range) of all median differences between length of hospitalization stay with cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and standard diagnostic strategy after 10,000 applications matched the trial's findings 100% of the time (18.06 h [17.76-18.32] vs. 18.1 h; p < 0.05). For ROMICAT-I, median of all REVERSE plaque prevalence (PP) at CCTA matched the observed PP at CCTA from ROMICAT-I (49.63% [48.2-51.2] vs. 49.7%). The REVERSE PP fell within 49.63% ± 5% in 9733 (97.33%) applications.
conclusionThe REVERSE model allows repurposing existing datasets to explore novel research questions while mitigating inherent biases through stringent inclusion criteria matching and randomization.
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.