Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42081009›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2026

Evaluation of clinical utility in emulated clinical trials.

Johannes Hruza, Arvid Sjölander, Erin E Gabriel, Samir Bhatt, Michael C Sachs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Johannes HruzaSection of Health Data Science and AI, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. johannes.hruza@sund.ku.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-9028-4103
Arvid SjölanderDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Erin E GabrielSection of Biostatistics and the Pioneer Centre for SMART biomed, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Samir BhattSection of Health Data Science and AI, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Michael C SachsSection of Biostatistics and the Pioneer Centre for SMART biomed, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1279-8676

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dynamic treatment regimes have been proposed to personalize treatment decisions by utilizing historical patient data, but they may not always improve on the current standard of care. It is thus meaningful to integrate the standard of care into the evaluation of treatment strategies, and previous works have suggested doing so through the concept of clinical utility. Here we will focus on the comparative component of clinical utility as the average outcome had the full population received treatment based on the proposed dynamic treatment regime in comparison to the full population receiving the "standard" treatment assignment mechanism, such as a physician's choice. Clinical trials to evaluate clinical utility are rarely conducted, and thus, previous works have proposed an emulated clinical trial framework using observational data. However, only one simple estimator was previously suggested, and the practical details of how one would conduct this emulated trial were not detailed. Here, we illuminate these details and propose several estimators of clinical utility based on estimators proposed in the dynamic treatment regime literature. We illustrate the considerations and the estimators in a real data example investigating treatment rules for rheumatoid arthritis, where we highlight that in addition to the standard of care, the current medical guidelines should also be compared to any estimated "optimal" decision rule.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPrecision MedicineArthritis, RheumatoidClinical RelevanceHumansResearch DesignStandard of CareCausal inferenceClinical utilityEmulated clinical trialPersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID42081009
PMCPMC13572323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.