ArticleJB & JS open access
The Use of Estimands in the Design and Analysis of Comparative Effectiveness Trials: The PEPPER Trial.
Article in JB & JS open access. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pragmatic trials have gained popularity in recent years because of their applicability to practical clinical situations. In contrast to traditional explanatory trials, which are tightly controlled and designed to define the effects of treatments under ideal circumstances, pragmatic trials are intended to reveal differences between established treatments in real-world situations. Although the intention-to-treat principle remains the cornerstone of explanatory trials, it may not reliably identify the treatment effect of greatest relevance in pragmatic trials. The estimand approach to trial design and analysis provides for specification and handling of various important intercurrent events that characterize pragmatic trials and arguably allows clearer definition of the treatment effects of interest for assorted real-world populations. Since pragmatic trials have considerable relevance to orthopaedics, we share the rationale for design and upcoming analysis of the Pulmonary Embolism Prevention after Hip and Knee Replacement Trial using an estimand framework.
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.