ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Covariate Adjustment for the Win Odds: Application to Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training (HF-ACTION)
A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Event-driven Trial of Quarterly Subcutaneous Canakinumab in the Prevention of Recurrent Cardiovascular Events Among Stable Post-myocardial Infarction Patients With Elevated hsCRP
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
Covariate adjustment can enhance precision and power in clinical trials, yet its application to the win odds remains unclear. The win odds is a treatment effect measure related to the win ratio. Both measures are based on pairwise comparisons between individuals in the treatment and the control group, and count the number of wins, losses, and ties from these pairwise comparisons. Importantly, the win odds treats ties as half a win for each group. A priori, it is not clear how covariate adjustment can be implemented for the win odds. To address this, we establish a connection between the win odds and the marginal probabilistic index, a measure for which covariate adjustment theory is well-developed. Using this connection, we show how covariate adjustment for the win odds is possible, leading to potentially more precise estimators and larger power as compared to the unadjusted win odds. We present the underlying theory for covariate adjustment for the win odds in an accessible way and apply the method on synthetic data based on the CANTOS trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01327846) characteristics, on a subset of the HF-ACTION trial data ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00047437), and on simulated data to study the operating characteristics of the method. We observe that there is indeed a potential gain in power when the win odds is adjusted for baseline covariates if the baseline covariates are prognostic for the outcome. This comes at the cost of a slight inflation of the type I error rate for small sample sizes.
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.