Evidence mapPaperPMID 41700655Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Modern Causal Inference Approaches to Improve Power for Subgroup Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials.

Antonio D'Alessandro, Jiyu Kim, Samrachana Adhikari, Donald Goff, Falco J Bargagli-Stoffi, Michele Santacatterina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Antonio D'AlessandroDivision of Biostatistics, New York University, New York, USA.
Jiyu KimDivision of Biostatistics, New York University, New York, USA.
Samrachana AdhikariDivision of Biostatistics, New York University, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9954-5999
Donald GoffDepartment of Psychiatry, New York University, New York, USA.
Falco J Bargagli-StoffiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6131-8165
Michele SantacatterinaDivision of Biostatistics, New York University, New York, USA.

Funding

SCH: A structural causal framework for adaptive experimentsR01AI197146 · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · 2025 to 2025
$299k
Amazon Web Services AI/ML for Identifying the Social Determinants of HealthNational Institute of Health 1R01AI197146-01National Science Foundation 2306556NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI197146
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often include subgroup analyses to assess whether treatment effects vary across prespecified patient populations. However, these analyses frequently suffer from small sample sizes, which limit the power to detect heterogeneous effects. Power can be improved by leveraging predictors of the outcome-that is, through covariate adjustment-as well as by borrowing external data from similar RCTs or observational studies. The benefits of covariate adjustment may be limited when the trial sample is small. Borrowing external data can increase the effective sample size and improve power, but it introduces two key challenges: (i) integrating data across sources can lead to model misspecification, and (ii) practical violations of the positivity assumption-where the probability of receiving the target treatment is near zero for some covariate profiles in the external data-can lead to extreme inverse-probability weights and unstable inferences, ultimately negating potential power gains. To account for these shortcomings, we present an approach to improving power in preplanned subgroup analyses of small RCTs that leverages both baseline predictors and external data. We propose de-biased estimators that accommodate parametric, machine learning (ML), and nonparametric Bayesian methods. To address practical positivity violations (PPVs), we introduce three estimators: A covariate-balancing approach, an automated de-biased machine learning (DML) estimator, and a calibrated-DML estimator. We show improved power in various simulations and offer practical recommendations for the application of the proposed methods. Finally, we apply them to evaluate the effectiveness of citalopram for negative symptoms in first-episode schizophrenia (FES) patients across subgroups defined by duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), using data from two small RCTs.

Indexed as

CausalityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBayes TheoremBiasComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansMachine LearningModels, StatisticalSample SizeSchizophreniaTreatment Effect Heterogeneitycausal inferencede‐biased machine learningheterogeneous treatment effectsmental healthrandomized trials

Identifiers

PMID41700655
PMCPMC13213542

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.