Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Extending Inferences from a Randomized Trial to Trial-eligible and Treatment-candidate Target Populations: Examples
Jessica C Young1,2, Issa J Dahabreh3,4,5, Stefan James6
1From the Unit of Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Extending randomized trial findings to broader populations is crucial. This study found similar risk ratios for bivalirudin vs. heparin in trial-eligible and treatment-candidate groups compared to the index trial.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Clinical Trial Methodology
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Randomized trials inform healthcare decisions, but trial participants may not represent real-world populations.
- The VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial compared bivalirudin and heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention.
- Generalizing trial results to wider patient groups is a key challenge in evidence-based medicine.
Purpose of the Study:
- To extend inferences from the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial to two broader, clinically relevant populations.
- To compare the effectiveness of bivalirudin versus heparin in trial-eligible and treatment-candidate populations.
- To assess the generalizability of randomized controlled trial (RCT) findings.
Main Methods:
- Logistic regression models were used to estimate outcomes at 180 days based on treatment assignment.
- Risk estimates were standardized to the baseline covariate distributions of the target populations.
- Swedish healthcare registry data characterized the trial-eligible and treatment-candidate populations.
Main Results:
- The estimated risk difference for bivalirudin vs. heparin was -1.1% in the trial-eligible and -1.0% in the treatment-candidate population.
- Risk ratios were similar to the index trial (0.92 and 0.93, respectively).
- Absolute risks were slightly higher (0.8-1.2 percentage points) in these broader populations compared to the index trial.
Conclusions:
- Risk ratios for bivalirudin vs. heparin align between the index trial and broader populations.
- Evidence from RCTs can be extended to wider populations using registry data.
- This approach helps address questions about treatment effects in populations beyond trial participants.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications
Clinical Trials: Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data

