ArticleJournal of biopharmaceutical statistics2022
Fast tipping point sensitivity analyses in clinical trials with missing continuous outcomes under multiple imputation.
Article in Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT02906930. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
Efficacy and Safety of Oral Semaglutide Versus Placebo in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated With Diet and Exercise Only.
Open the trial in the graphWho cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Left Ventricular Entry to Reduce Brain Lesions During Catheter Ablation: A Randomized Trial.Circulation · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Change ofFrontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Tipping point analysis in network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- A simplified scoring system for predicting treatment response in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (EAST score).Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Tipping point analysis for the between-arm correlation in an arm-based evidence synthesis.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- The performance of a Bayesian value-based sequential clinical trial design in the presence of an equivocal cost-effectiveness signal: evidence from the HERO trial.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When dealing with missing data in clinical trials, it is often convenient to work under simplifying assumptions, such as missing at random (MAR), and follow up with sensitivity analyses to address unverifiable missing data assumptions. One such sensitivity analysis, routinely requested by regulatory agencies, is the so-called tipping point analysis, in which the treatment effect is re-evaluated after adding a successively more extreme shift parameter to the predicted values among subjects with missing data. If the shift parameter needed to overturn the conclusion is so extreme that it is considered clinically implausible, then this indicates robustness to missing data assumptions. Tipping point analyses are frequently used in the context of continuous outcome data under multiple imputation. While simple to implement, computation can be cumbersome in the two-way setting where both comparator and active arms are shifted, essentially requiring the evaluation of a two-dimensional grid of models. We describe a computationally efficient approach to performing two-way tipping point analysis in the setting of continuous outcome data with multiple imputation. We show how geometric properties can lead to further simplification when exploring the impact of missing data. Lastly, we propose a novel extension to a multi-way setting which yields simple and general sufficient conditions for robustness to missing data assumptions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35653556What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.