Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42781726›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical statistics

Evaluating the Impact of Outcome Delay on the Efficiency of Sample Size Re-Estimation.

Aritra Mukherjee, Michael J Grayling, James M S Wason

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical statistics. 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

3 authors.

Aritra MukherjeePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4531-6047
Michael J GraylingJanssen, High Wycombe, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0680-6668
James M S WasonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4691-126X

Funding

NIHR NIHR301614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sample size re-estimation (SSR) can be a powerful tool to ensure that a clinical trial meets its pre-specified power requirements when uncertainty regarding a design parameter exists at the planning stage. However, long-term primary endpoints can be harmful to the efficiency of this trial design. If recruitment is continued while treatment outcomes are awaited, long delays can potentially lead to a large number of 'pipeline' participants being recruited in the trial that do not contribute to the interim analysis. This may lead to a larger number of recruited participants than are actually deemed required, resulting in an over-powered trial with high cost. This paper studies the exact impact of such outcome delay on the efficiency of 'internal pilot' type SSR designs. The distribution of the final sample size post SSR is obtained under various delay lengths for both continuous and binary outcome data; how delay impacts the precision of the final sample size estimate is then discussed. Precisely, the impact of delay on this precision is assessed through RMSE, as well as two more novel metrics, termed the delay impact and cost. The results indicate that with an increase in delay length, the delay impact increases, inflating average sample size and power. However, the severity of the effect of delayed outcomes depends highly on the exact trial setting. Trials where the re-estimated sample size is smaller than originally planned suffer the most from delayed outcomes, often leading to an over-powered trial. However, the impact of delay is substantially less if the originally planned sample size remains smaller than the re-estimated sample size.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicResearch DesignEndpoint DeterminationHumansSample SizeTime FactorsTreatment Outcomeadaptive designinterim analysisoutcome delaysample size re‐estimationtwo‐stage

Identifiers

PMID42781726
PMCPMC13602115

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.