ReviewEClinicalMedicine2025
Hierarchical composite endpoints in clinical trials for multimorbid older adults.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 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.
- Gram-negative bacterial infection randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the 21st century: characteristics and evolution.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hierarchical composite endpoints (HCEs) has the potential to make clinical trials for multimorbid older adults more relevant. Unlike conventional time-to-first-event analyses-which can give more weight to outcomes of lesser relevance-HCEs rank outcomes by importance to patients and clinicians. This allows priorities such as avoiding hospital stays, maintaining quality of life, and preserving independence to shape trial results, while still accounting for conventional outcomes like mortality. Because they use information from more patients, HCEs can also increase statistical power, which is particularly useful in trials where recruiting older adults is difficult and evidence to guide treatment is limited. However, deciding the order of outcomes requires balancing patient and clinical priorities, and ensuring consistency and regulatory acceptance.
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.