Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40895282›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Statistical Association2025

Harsh Parikh, Rachael K Ross, Elizabeth Stuart, Kara E Rudolph

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Regularizing Extrapolation in Causal Inference.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2026
    Article
  4. AAdvances in neural information processing systems · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. SubgroupTE: Advancing Treatment Effect Estimation with Subgroup Identification.ACM transactions on intelligent systems and technology · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Harsh ParikhDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University.
Rachael K RossDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University.
Elizabeth StuartDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University.
Kara E RudolphDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University.

Funding

Design and analysis advances to improve generalizability of clinical trials for treating opioid use disorderR01DA056407 · NIDA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Kara Elizabeth Rudolph, Elizabeth A. Stuart · 2022 to 2026
$3.1M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA056407
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) serve as the cornerstone for understanding causal effects, yet extending inferences to target populations presents challenges due to effect heterogeneity and underrepresentation. Our paper addresses the critical issue of identifying and characterizing underrepresented subgroups in RCTs, proposing a novel framework for refining target populations to improve generalizability. We introduce an optimization-based approach, Rashomon Set of Optimal Trees (ROOT), to characterize underrepresented groups. ROOT optimizes the target subpopulation distribution by minimizing the variance of the target average treatment effect estimate, ensuring more precise treatment effect estimations. Notably, ROOT generates interpretable characteristics of the underrepresented population, aiding researchers in effective communication. Our approach demonstrates improved precision and interpretability compared to alternatives, as illustrated with synthetic data experiments. We apply our methodology to extend inferences from the Starting Treatment with Agonist Replacement Therapies (START) trial - investigating the effectiveness of medication for opioid use disorder - to the real-world population represented by the Treatment Episode Dataset: Admissions (TEDS-A). By refining target populations using ROOT, our framework offers a systematic approach to enhance decision-making accuracy and inform future trials in diverse populations.

Indexed as

Causal InferenceData FusionGeneralizabilityInterpretabilityMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID40895282
PMCPMC12393784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.