Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42909797›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026

The Role of Digital Twins in Clinical Trials: A New Perspective on Methodological and Statistical Challenges.

Fatma Nur Cicin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 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

1 author.

Fatma Nur CicinDepartment of Management Information Systems, Faculty of Economics, Administrative and Social Sciences, Istinye University, Ayazağa Mah, Azerbaycan Cad, (Vadistanbul 4A Blok), Sarıyer, 34396, Istanbul, Türkiye. fatma.cicin@istinye.edu.tr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain the gold standard for evaluating medical interventions, yet they face persistent methodological challenges: patient dropout, inadequate sample sizes, premature termination, missing data, and the limitations of indirect treatment comparisons. The emergence of digital twin technology-computational patient representations that generate simulated clinical trajectories statistically indistinguishable from real-world data-offers a promising methodological complement to address these limitations. APPROACH: We synthesize evidence from key methodological literature, regulatory guidance (ICH E9(R1), FDA, EMA), and proof-of-concept studies across oncology, neurology, and Alzheimer's disease. A taxonomy of in silico clinical trial approaches provides the organizational framework. This article is a narrative perspective rather than a systematic review; no predefined search strategy, database range, or inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied.

resultsDigital twins may provide complementary methodological approaches across nine trial challenges: model-based sensitivity analyses for missing (MNAR) outcomes; Bayesian and posterior predictive modeling of partially observed longitudinal outcomes; prognostic covariate adjustment and virtual augmentation to improve efficiency; prospective simulation of futility stopping rules; prospective calibration of efficacy stopping boundaries; individualized control-arm (ICA) construction; hybrid augmented and synthetic control strategies; pre-trial protocol optimization through in silico simulation; and population-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.

conclusionsDigital twins represent an emerging methodological ecosystem rather than isolated tools. Their methodological potential depends on consistent validation and explainability standards; frameworks for detecting algorithmic bias; clarification of regulatory acceptance criteria; and comprehensive data infrastructure addressing representativeness gaps. Digital twin approaches should be viewed as complementary to-not replacements for-established randomized trial methodology.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceClinical trial methodologyDigital twinExternal control armIn silico trialMissing dataPopulation-adjusted indirect comparisonStatistical power

Identifiers

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.