ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2026
Methodological considerations for analyzing enriched enrolment randomized withdrawal trials.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Enriched Enrolment Randomized Withdrawal (EERW) design has been widely employed under various names across multiple disease areas. The methodology underlying these trials remains subject to ongoing discussion. A review of the literature identified key criticisms associated with the EERW design, notably the Open-Label Effect (OLE) resulting from the initial Open-Label (OL) phase and the Selection Effect (SLE) arising from selecting responders at the conclusion of the OL period. The aim of this study was to quantify these effects using historical data and to propose a straightforward approach to mitigate their impact.
methodsBased on proposals to estimate SLE and OLE effects, we conducted a retrospective analysis on a sample of 42 EERWs studies in various disorders and pathologies.
resultsThe OLE effect was confirmed with a highly significant additional increase of the main final endpoint (Standardized effect β
conclusionWhile EERW designs are widely utilized, the impact of the Open-Label (OL) phase on statistical outcomes remains under-addressed. This study quantifies two distinct and specific OLE and SLE effects increasing the residual variability and reducing the precision of the studied treatment estimate. By incorporating these effects as adjustments within the primary inferential model, researchers can mitigate extraneous noise and improve the precision and robustness of EERW trial results.
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.