Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2018
Regression Discontinuity and Randomized Controlled Trial Estimates: An Application to The Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trials.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Oldenburg Catherine E, Venkatesh Prajna N, Krishnan Tiruvengada, Rajaraman Revathi, Srinivasan Muthiah, Ray Kathryn J, O'Brien Kieran S, Glymour M Maria, Porco Travis C, Acharya Nisha R, Rose-Nussbaumer Jennifer, Lietman Thomas M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We compare results from regression discontinuity (RD) analysis to primary results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) utilizing data from two contemporaneous RCTs for treatment of fungal corneal ulcers.
METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trials I and II (MUTT I & MUTT II) based on baseline visual acuity: patients with acuity ≤ 20/400 (logMAR 1.3) enrolled in MUTT I, and >20/400 in MUTT II. MUTT I investigated the effect of topical natamycin versus voriconazole on best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. MUTT II investigated the effect of topical voriconazole plus placebo versus topical voriconazole plus oral voriconazole. We compared the RD estimate (natamycin arm of MUTT I [N = 162] versus placebo arm of MUTT II [N = 54]) to the RCT estimate from MUTT I (topical natamycin [N = 162] versus topical voriconazole [N = 161]).
RESULTS: In the RD, patients receiving natamycin had mean improvement of 4-lines of visual acuity at 3 months (logMAR -0.39, 95% CI: -0.61, -0.17) compared to topical voriconazole plus placebo, and 2-lines in the RCT (logMAR -0.18, 95% CI: -0.30, -0.05) compared to topical voriconazole.
CONCLUSIONS: The RD and RCT estimates were similar, although the RD design overestimated effects compared to the RCT.
METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trials I and II (MUTT I & MUTT II) based on baseline visual acuity: patients with acuity ≤ 20/400 (logMAR 1.3) enrolled in MUTT I, and >20/400 in MUTT II. MUTT I investigated the effect of topical natamycin versus voriconazole on best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. MUTT II investigated the effect of topical voriconazole plus placebo versus topical voriconazole plus oral voriconazole. We compared the RD estimate (natamycin arm of MUTT I [N = 162] versus placebo arm of MUTT II [N = 54]) to the RCT estimate from MUTT I (topical natamycin [N = 162] versus topical voriconazole [N = 161]).
RESULTS: In the RD, patients receiving natamycin had mean improvement of 4-lines of visual acuity at 3 months (logMAR -0.39, 95% CI: -0.61, -0.17) compared to topical voriconazole plus placebo, and 2-lines in the RCT (logMAR -0.18, 95% CI: -0.30, -0.05) compared to topical voriconazole.
CONCLUSIONS: The RD and RCT estimates were similar, although the RD design overestimated effects compared to the RCT.