Evidence mapPaperPMID 30312378Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of epidemiology2019

Comparison of Methods to Generalize Randomized Clinical Trial Results Without Individual-Level Data for the Target Population.

Jin-Liern Hong, Michael Webster-Clark, Michele Jonsson Funk, Til Stürmer, Sara E Dempster, Stephen R Cole, Iksha Herr, Robert LoCasale

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

8 authors.

Jin-Liern HongDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Michael Webster-ClarkDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Michele Jonsson FunkDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Til StürmerDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Sara E DempsterR&D Information, AstraZeneca, Waltham, Massachusetts.
Stephen R ColeDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Iksha HerrMedical Evidence and Observational Research, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Robert LoCasaleMedical Evidence and Observational Research, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, Maryland.

Funding

UNC Center for AIDS Research Core F BiostatisticsP30AI050410 · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · 2001 to 2025
$10.9M
CFAR Network of Integrated Clinical Systems (CNICS)R24AI067039 · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · 2025 to 2025
$6.4M
Propensity scores and preventive drug use in the elderlyR01AG056479 · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · 2025 to 2025
$558k
Propensity Scores and Preventive Drug Use in the ElderlyR01AG023178 · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · 2005 to 2005
$309k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001111NCI NIH HHS R01 CA174453NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL118255NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI050410NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI100654NIAID NIH HHS R24 AI067039NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI103390NIA NIH HHS R01 AG023178NIA NIH HHS R01 AG056479NIA NIH HHS R56 AG023178NICHD NIH HHS DP2 HD084070NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD080214NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD011680
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our study explored the application of methods to generalize randomized controlled trial results to a target population without individual-level data. We compared 4 methods using aggregate data for the target population to generalize results from the international trial, Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER), to a target population of trial-eligible patients in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). The gold-standard method used individual data from both the trial and CPRD to predict probabilities of being sampled in the trial and to reweight trial participants to reflect CPRD patient characteristics. Methods 1 and 2 used weighting methods based on simulated individual data or the method of moments, respectively. Method 3 weighted the trial's subgroup-specific treatment effects to match the distribution of an effect modifier in CPRD. Method 4 calculated the expected absolute benefits in CPRD assuming homogeneous relative treatment effect. Methods based on aggregate data for the target population generally yielded results between the trial and gold-standard estimates. Methods 1 and 2 yielded estimates closest to the gold-standard estimates when continuous effect modifiers were represented as categorical variables. Although individual data or data on joint distributions remains the best approach to generalize trial results, these methods using aggregate data might be useful tools for timely assessment of randomized trial generalizability.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic Research DesignAgedCardiovascular DiseasesData Interpretation, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRosuvastatin CalciumRosuvastatin Calcium

Identifiers

PMID30312378
PMCPMC6357813

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
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 Socratic graph.