Literature DB >> 11180308

Unequal cluster sizes for trials in English and Welsh general practice: implications for sample size calculations.

S M Kerry1, J M Bland.   

Abstract

Cluster randomized trials are often used in primary care settings. In the U.K., general practices are usually the unit of allocation. The effect of variability in practice list size on sample size calculations is demonstrated using the General Medical Services Statistics for England and Wales, 1997. Summary statistics and tables are given to help design such trials assuming that a fixed proportion of patients are to be recruited from each cluster. Three different weightings of the cluster means are compared: uniform, cluster size and minimum variance weights. Minimum variance weights are shown to be superior to uniform, particularly when clusters are small, and to cluster size weights, particularly when clusters are large. Where there are large numbers of participants per cluster and cluster size weights are used, the power actually falls as more patients are recruited to large clusters. When minimum variance weights are used the increase in the design effect due to variation in list size is small, regardless of the size of intracluster correlation coefficient or the number of participants per cluster, provided there is no loss of randomized units. When the expected number of participants per practice is low a greater loss in power comes from practices which fail to recruit patients. A method to estimate the likely effect and allow for it is presented. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11180308     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0258(20010215)20:3<377::aid-sim799>3.0.co;2-n

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  41 in total

Review 1.  Design and analysis of group-randomized trials: a review of recent methodological developments.

Authors:  David M Murray; Sherri P Varnell; Jonathan L Blitstein
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Review of Recent Methodological Developments in Group-Randomized Trials: Part 1-Design.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Turner; Fan Li; John A Gallis; Melanie Prague; David M Murray
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Extending cluster lot quality assurance sampling designs for surveillance programs.

Authors:  Lauren Hund; Marcello Pagano
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Comparing cluster-level dynamic treatment regimens using sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials: Regression estimation and sample size considerations.

Authors:  Timothy NeCamp; Amy Kilbourne; Daniel Almirall
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 5.  Cluster-Randomized Studies.

Authors:  Eva Lorenz; Sascha Köpke; Holger Pfaff; Maria Blettner
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 5.594

6.  A new dependence parameter approach to improve the design of cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes.

Authors:  Catherine M Crespi; Weng Kee Wong; Sheng Wu
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 2.486

7.  Recommendations for choosing an analysis method that controls Type I error for unbalanced cluster sample designs with Gaussian outcomes.

Authors:  Jacqueline L Johnson; Sarah M Kreidler; Diane J Catellier; David M Murray; Keith E Muller; Deborah H Glueck
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Design effect in multicenter studies: gain or loss of power?

Authors:  Emilie Vierron; Bruno Giraudeau
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  Profound and sustained reduction in Chlamydia trachomatis in The Gambia: a five-year longitudinal study of trachoma endemic communities.

Authors:  Matthew J Burton; Martin J Holland; Pateh Makalo; Esther A N Aryee; Ansumana Sillah; Sandra Cohuet; Angels Natividad; Neal D E Alexander; David C W Mabey; Robin L Bailey
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2010-10-05

10.  Electronic health records for intervention research: a cluster randomized trial to reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care (eCRT study).

Authors:  Martin C Gulliford; Tjeerd van Staa; Alex Dregan; Lisa McDermott; Gerard McCann; Mark Ashworth; Judith Charlton; Paul Little; Michael V Moore; Lucy Yardley
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 5.166

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.