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.
RCT Entities:
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.
Authors: Jonathan Shoag; Joshua Halpern; Brian Eisner; Richard Lee; Sameer Mittal; Christopher E Barbieri; Daniel Shoag Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Leah M Smith; Erin C Strumpf; Jay S Kaufman; Aisha Lofters; Michael Schwandt; Linda E Lévesque Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Prajna Lalitha; Catherine Q Sun; N Venkatesh Prajna; Rajarathinam Karpagam; Manoharan Geetha; Kieran S O'Brien; Vicky Cevallos; Stephen D McLeod; Nisha R Acharya; Thomas M Lietman Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-10-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Till Bärnighausen; Catherine Oldenburg; Peter Tugwell; Christian Bommer; Cara Ebert; Mauricio Barreto; Eric Djimeu; Noah Haber; Hugh Waddington; Peter Rockers; Barbara Sianesi; Jacob Bor; Günther Fink; Jeffrey Valentine; Jeffrey Tanner; Tom Stanley; Eduardo Sierra; Eric Tchetgen Tchetgen; Rifat Atun; Sebastian Vollmer Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 7.407
Authors: Catherine E Oldenburg; Jacob Bor; Guy Harling; Frank Tanser; Tinofa Mutevedzi; Maryam Shahmanesh; George R Seage; Victor De Gruttola; Matthew J Mimiaga; Kenneth H Mayer; Deenan Pillay; Till Bärnighausen Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 4.632