Trial reportBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2023
On the relevance of prognostic information for clinical trials: A theoretical quantification.
Trial report in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal prognostic modeling of individual cognitive trajectories to enhance trial efficiency in preclinical Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Trial
- On the relevance of prognostic information for clinical trials: A theoretical quantification.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2023Trial
- Stratification in small randomised clinical trials and analysis of covariance: Some simple theory and recommendations.Statistical methods in medical research · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a clinical prognosis prediction model for malignant intestinal obstruction: A retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Predicted natural progression as an Alzheimer's prognostic covariate improves the precision of lecanemab efficacy assessments and clinical trial efficiency.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Increasing Power in Phase III Oncology Trials With Multivariable Regression: An Empirical Assessment of 535 Primary End Point Analyses.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024Article
- The analysis of continuous data from n-of-1 trials using paired cycles: a simple tutorial.Trials · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The question of how individual patient data from cohort studies or historical clinical trials can be leveraged for designing more powerful, or smaller yet equally powerful, clinical trials becomes increasingly important in the era of digitalization. Today, the traditional statistical analyses approaches may seem questionable to practitioners in light of ubiquitous historical prognostic information. Several methodological developments aim at incorporating historical information in the design and analysis of future clinical trials, most importantly Bayesian information borrowing, propensity score methods, stratification, and covariate adjustment. Adjusting the analysis with respect to a prognostic score, which was obtained from some model applied to historical data, received renewed interest from a machine learning perspective, and we study the potential of this approach for randomized clinical trials. In an idealized situation of a normal outcome in a two-arm trial with 1:1 allocation, we derive a simple sample size reduction formula as a function of two criteria characterizing the prognostic score: (1) the coefficient of determination R
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.