Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41277847›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2026

A patient-centric paradigm and tool for clinical research: the DOOR is open.

Toshimitsu Hamasaki, Yijie He, Qihang Wu, Jessica Howard-Anderson, Helen W Boucher, Sarah B Doernberg, Thomas L Holland, John H Powers, Jing Wang, Guoqing Diao and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
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

14 authors.

Toshimitsu HamasakiThe Biostatistics Center, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4928-1160
Yijie HeThe Biostatistics Center, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Qihang WuThe Biostatistics Center, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-5470-5439
Jessica Howard-AndersonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9924-0458
Helen W BoucherTufts University School of Medicine and Tufts Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sarah B DoernbergDepartment of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Thomas L HollandDepartment of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7745-9010
John H PowersDepartment of Medicine, George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Jing WangClinical Monitoring Research Program Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, Maryland, USA.
Guoqing DiaoThe Biostatistics Center, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7304-9591
David van DuinDivision of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4784-3227
Vance G FowlerDepartment of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8048-0897
Henry F ChambersDepartment of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Scott R EvansThe Biostatistics Center, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3186-172X

Funding

WORK ORDER 126643 B539 EXPAND IC SUITE75N91019D00024 · NIAID · LEIDOS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, INC. · PI BRISCOE, LYNN · 2019 to 2025
$3932.6M
Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG)UM1AI104681 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Vance G. Fowler, Henry F HENRY CHAMBERS · 2013 to 2026
$180.8M
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases UM1AI104681NCI NIH HHS 75N91019D00024NIAID NIH HHS UM1 AI104681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials are the gold standard for evaluating the benefits and harms of interventions and yet may not provide the evidence needed to inform medical decision-making, an ultimate goal for clinical research. Commonly used design and analysis approaches are often not suited to answer the most important questions to inform clinical practice, specifically how do resulting patient experiences, when comprehensively considering benefits and harms, compare between therapeutic alternatives? The standard approach of siloed analysis of one outcome at a time: (i) does not incorporate associations between multiple outcomes; (ii) does not recognize the cumulative nature of multiple outcomes in individual patients or recognize important gradations of global patient response; (iii) suffers from competing risk complexities during interpretation of individual outcomes; (iv) provides for ambiguous generalizability with respect to benefit:risk since efficacy and safety analyses are often conducted on different populations. Evaluation of treatment effect heterogeneity to identify subgroups for treatment or avoidance of treatment is typically evaluated based on a single efficacy or safety endpoint and rarely evaluated based on the overall benefit:risk. Methods that quantify and compare the patient experience are needed. The desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is a paradigm for the design, monitoring, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of clinical trials and other research studies based on patient-centric benefit:risk evaluation, developed to address these issues and advance clinical trial science. Aligning the clinical research strategy with the relevant question for clinical practice will enhance research applicability. Careful design and comprehensive analyses are critical for DOOR paradigm application. We provide a recommended statistical analysis plan for research studies implementing DOOR, describe its elements, and illustrate analysis application using examples. A freely available online tool for the recommended analyses and the design of studies implementing the DOOR paradigm is provided.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchPatient-Centered CareHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Designbenefit:riskDOORDOOR probabilitypartial creditpatient-centricpragmatic trial

Identifiers

PMID41277847
PMCPMC12777562

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.