Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42853134›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Robust Alpha Spending for Unstable Data.

Ivair R Silva, Judith C Maro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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

2 authors.

Ivair R SilvaDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2701-8924
Judith C MaroDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9900-2142

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 302882/2022-7Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais PQ-00787-21Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais RED-00133-21Robert H. Ebert Career Development Award 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sequential hypothesis testing has been used in randomized clinical trials and in monitoring adverse events after vaccination. Typically, the presumption is that all data that have been previously used in the sequential analysis remain the same, and only new data are added. We call this the "anchoring" assumption. In prelicensing randomized trials, enrollment goals are set based on these sequential hypothesis tests so that a trial may stop if a drug proves either too hazardous or, conversely, so beneficial that it would be unethical to deny the treatment to others. However, in monitoring adverse events after vaccination, data are mostly "secondary use," or real-world data. That is, these data are not gathered for research, but are clinical data that have been repurposed for observational vaccine safety surveillance. As such, the counts of exposed persons and adverse events may be subject to revisions over time. These data changes directly challenge the anchoring assumption upon which most sequential hypothesis testing depends. If these data changes are discovered prior to subsequent hypothesis tests, it is unclear how to account for these changes in subsequent tests. We introduce a solution: "robust alpha spending" to protect overall type I error probability, statistical power, and surveillance time from low-level data instability present in secondary use data sources used for adverse event monitoring.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingVaccinationVaccinesVaccinesadverse eventsexpected time to signalpost‐market vaccine safety surveillancerelative risksequential test

Identifiers

PMID42853134

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.