S Teerenstra1, R J F Melis, P G M Peer, G F Borm. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands. z824116@umcn.nl
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: When contamination is present, randomization on a patient level leads to dilution of the treatment effect. The usual solution is to randomize on a cluster level, but at the cost of efficiency and more importantly, this may introduce selection bias. Furthermore, it may slow down recruitment in the clusters that are randomized to the "less interesting" treatment. We discuss an alternative randomization procedure to approach these problems. METHODS: Pseudo cluster randomization is a two-stage randomization procedure that balances between individual randomization and cluster randomization. For common scenarios, the design factors needed to calculate the appropriate sample size are tabulated. RESULTS: A pseudo cluster randomized design can reduce selection bias and contamination, while maintaining good efficiency and possibly improving enrollment. To make a well-informed choice of randomization procedure, we discuss the advantages of each method and provide a decision flow chart. CONCLUSION: When contamination is thought to be substantial in an individually randomized setting and a cluster randomized design would suffer from selection bias and/or slow recruitment, pseudo cluster randomization can be considered.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: When contamination is present, randomization on a patient level leads to dilution of the treatment effect. The usual solution is to randomize on a cluster level, but at the cost of efficiency and more importantly, this may introduce selection bias. Furthermore, it may slow down recruitment in the clusters that are randomized to the "less interesting" treatment. We discuss an alternative randomization procedure to approach these problems. METHODS: Pseudo cluster randomization is a two-stage randomization procedure that balances between individual randomization and cluster randomization. For common scenarios, the design factors needed to calculate the appropriate sample size are tabulated. RESULTS: A pseudo cluster randomized design can reduce selection bias and contamination, while maintaining good efficiency and possibly improving enrollment. To make a well-informed choice of randomization procedure, we discuss the advantages of each method and provide a decision flow chart. CONCLUSION: When contamination is thought to be substantial in an individually randomized setting and a cluster randomized design would suffer from selection bias and/or slow recruitment, pseudo cluster randomization can be considered.
Authors: S Vliek; R J Melis; M Faes; G A Golüke-Willemse; B J de Leest; E Meeuwsen; F H J M van Raak; C J M Schölzel-Dorenbos; M G M Olde Rikkert Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Brian W Pence; Bradley N Gaynes; Nathan M Thielman; Amy Heine; Michael J Mugavero; Elizabeth L Turner; Evelyn B Quinlivan Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Brian W Pence; Bradley N Gaynes; Julie L Adams; Nathan M Thielman; Amy D Heine; Michael J Mugavero; Teena McGuinness; James L Raper; James H Willig; Kristen G Shirey; Michelle Ogle; Elizabeth L Turner; E Byrd Quinlivan Journal: AIDS Date: 2015-09-24 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: David C Klonoff; Richard Bergenstal; Lawrence Blonde; Suzanne Austin Boren; Timothy S Church; Jenifer Gaffaney; Lois Jovanovic; David M Kendall; Craig Kollman; Boris P Kovatchev; Claudia Leippert; David R Owens; William H Polonsky; Gérard Reach; Eric Renard; Michael C Riddell; Richard R Rubin; Oliver Schnell; Linda M Siminiero; Robert A Vigersky; Darrell M Wilson; Alison Okada Wollitzer Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2008-11
Authors: René J F Melis; Monique I J van Eijken; George F Borm; Michel Wensing; Eddy Adang; Eloy H van de Lisdonk; Theo van Achterberg; Marcel G M Olde Rikkert Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2005-10-05 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Laura E Kunst; Joyce Maas; Anton J L M van Balkom; Marcel A L M van Assen; Brenda Kouwenhoven; Marrie H J Bekker Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2021-12-24 Impact factor: 8.128