ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025
Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling as a method for causal inference to predict exposures under desired within-subject dose titration schemes.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling as a method for causal inference to predict exposures under desired within-subject dose titration schemes.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ICH E9 (R1) guidance and the related estimand framework propose to clearly define and separate the clinical question of interest formulated as estimand from the estimation method. With that it becomes important to assess the validity of the estimation method and the assumptions that must be made. When going beyond the intention to treat analyses that can rely on randomization, causal inference is usually used to discuss the validity of estimation methods for the estimand of interest. In pharmacometrics, mixed-effects models are routinely used to analyze longitudinal clinical trial data; however, they are rarely discussed as a method for causal inference. Here, we evaluate nonlinear mixed-effects modeling and simulation (NLME M&S) in the context of causal inference as a standardization method for longitudinal data in the presence of confounders. Standardization is a well-known method in causal inference to correct for confounding by analyzing and combining results from subgroups of patients. We show that nonlinear mixed-effects modeling is a particular implementation of standardization that conditions on individual parameters described by the random effects of the mixed-effects model. As an example, we use a simulated clinical trial with within-subject dose titration. Being interested in the outcome of the hypothetical situation that patients adhere to the planned treatment schedule, we put assumptions in a causal diagram. From the causal diagram, conditional independence assumptions are derived either by conditioning on the individual parameters or on earlier outcomes. With both conditional independencies unbiased estimates can be obtained.
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.