ArticleNature communications2026
Evaluating bias in target trial emulation for heart failure across statistical and deep learning methods.
Article in Nature communications, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Target trial emulation (TTE) is increasingly used for causal inference from observational data, but remains vulnerable to confounding by indication, and whether advanced adjustment methods mitigate this bias is unclear. Using Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, we emulate target trials of beta-blockers (positive control) and digoxin (negative control) versus usual care on two-year all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We apply four adjustment strategies: propensity score matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting, targeted maximum likelihood estimation, and a Transformer-based deep learning approach. No method reproduces the randomised controlled trial (RCT) benchmarks: all suggest neutral or harmful effects for beta-blockers and elevated mortality for digoxin. In semi-synthetic simulation, all methods recover the true effects when confounders are observed, yet fail in real-world data. TTE, even with advanced adjustment, may not yield trial-equivalent estimates when confounding is strong; randomised evidence remains essential for clinical and policy decisions.
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.