ArticlePloS one2026
Extension of Regression Discontinuity Designs (RDD) to evaluate time effects - A quasi-experimental approach using the data from the new form of care "Integrated cross-sectoral psycho-oncology (nFC- isPO)".
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard in clinical research. However, randomization isn't always feasible, e.g., due to ethical considerations. As a result, quasi-experimental designs, such as the regression-discontinuity design (RDD), have been advocated as valuable alternatives and are increasingly employed in health sciences. So far, however, there is no way to take repeated measures into account in an RDD analysis, although repeated measures are not uncommon in medical research. This article proposes an extension of the RDD methodology to incorporate repeated measures within the statistical analysis.
methodsThe article introduces consistent mathematical notation for combining a univariate RDD with a linear mixed model (LMM) to account for repeated measures. The application is presented using data from the nFC-isPO (N = 1,417), where the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was employed to assess anxiety and depression in newly diagnosed cancer patients over a 12-month treatment period. The HADS scores were measured at baseline (T1), after 4 months (T2) and after 12 months (T3). Patients were assigned to control (psychosocial care) or treatment (psycho-oncological-psychotherapeutic care) group based on a predetermined HADS threshold at T1.
resultsThe average treatment effect (ATE) was similar in both univariate RDD and LMM-RDD when applied to complete cases. Including all available data (T2 and/or T3), univariate RDD analyses were based on different samples for each time point. At T2, the ATE sign reversed from negative to positive, suggesting a change in discontinuity direction. At T3, the ATE magnitude nearly doubled compared to the complete case analysis. LMM-RDD estimated treatment effects were higher than those from univariate RDD. Nevertheless, none reached statistical significance. The time effect ([Formula: see text]), representing the difference in treatment effects between two time points (complete case: [Formula: see text]=0.577; T2 and/or T3 available: [Formula: see text]=0.491), was not significant (p = 0.855; 95%-CI: [-5.589; 6.743]; p = 0.869, 95%-CI: [-5.328; 6.310]).
conclusionExtending the RDD to incorporate repeated measures within a linear mixed model (LMM-RDD) provides a more robust and comprehensive analytical approach when an RCT is not feasible. This approach not only addresses the challenges of missing data and an unbalanced number of outcome measures, but also allows for the identification of time-varying treatment effects that may not be discernible using traditional RDD.
trial registrationThe study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Registry on 30 October 2018 under the ID "DRKS00015326".
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.