Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42503171›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Improving Sensitivity Analysis By Synthesizing Randomized Clinical Trials With Limited Overlap.

Kuan Jiang, Wenjie Hu, Xinxing Lai, Shu Yang, Xiao-Hua Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 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.

Kuan JiangDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2935-5425
Wenjie HuDepartment of Probability and Statistics, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6802-6181
Xinxing LaiInstitute for Brain Disorders, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shu YangDepartment of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
Xiao-Hua ZhouDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Beijing International Center for Mathematical Research, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7935-1222

Funding

Beijing Nova Program of Science and Technology Z211100002121061Young Elite Scientist Sponsorship Program by the China Association for Science and Technology 2021-QNRC1-04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are widely regarded as the gold standard for estimating average treatment effects, their external validity is often constrained by limited sample sizes and restrictive inclusion/exclusion criteria, which may compromise the generalizability of findings to broader real-world populations. Conversely, observational studies typically consist of representative real-world samples but are susceptible to bias due to unmeasured confounders, undermining their internal validity. To address the limitation, sensitivity analysis is often used to estimate bounds for the average treatment effect (ATE) without relying on stringent assumptions of other existing methods. This article introduces a novel synthesis sensitivity analysis estimator that enhances sensitivity analysis in observational studies by incorporating RCT data, even when limited covariate overlap exists between datasets due to differential inclusion/exclusion criteria. We show that the proposed estimator will give a tighter bound when a "separability" condition holds for the sensitivity parameter. Theoretical proofs and simulations show that this method provides a tighter bound than the sensitivity analysis using only observational study data. We apply this method to combine observational study data on drug effectiveness comparison with a partially overlapping RCT data, yielding tighter average treatment effect bounds.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicBiasComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalObservational Studies as TopicSensitivity and Specificitydata fusiongeneralizabilitypositivity violationtransportability

Identifiers

PMID42503171
PMCPMC13401964

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.