Janice Christie1, Peter O'Halloran, Mike Stevenson. 1. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom. j.christie@qub.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The standard approach in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to randomize individuals to intervention and control groups. Yet, nursing and other health interventions are often implemented at the levels of health service organizational unit or geographical area. It may be more appropriate to conduct a cluster RCT. However, cluster randomization requires consideration of a number of important issues. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to show how critical issues in relation to design and analysis can be addressed. APPROACH: Two cluster RCTs conducted by the authors are used as examples. Guidance on the conduct and reporting of cluster RCTs is also offered. RESULTS: A rationale for choosing this design was provided, and issues in relation to study design, calculation of sample size, and statistical analysis were clarified. A decision tree and checklist are provided to guide researchers through essential steps in conducting a cluster RCT. DISCUSSION: Cluster RCTs present special challenges in relation to design, conduct, and analysis. Nevertheless, they are an appropriate and potentially powerful tool for nursing research. With careful attention to the issues addressed in this article, researchers can use this approach successfully.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The standard approach in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to randomize individuals to intervention and control groups. Yet, nursing and other health interventions are often implemented at the levels of health service organizational unit or geographical area. It may be more appropriate to conduct a cluster RCT. However, cluster randomization requires consideration of a number of important issues. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to show how critical issues in relation to design and analysis can be addressed. APPROACH: Two cluster RCTs conducted by the authors are used as examples. Guidance on the conduct and reporting of cluster RCTs is also offered. RESULTS: A rationale for choosing this design was provided, and issues in relation to study design, calculation of sample size, and statistical analysis were clarified. A decision tree and checklist are provided to guide researchers through essential steps in conducting a cluster RCT. DISCUSSION: Cluster RCTs present special challenges in relation to design, conduct, and analysis. Nevertheless, they are an appropriate and potentially powerful tool for nursing research. With careful attention to the issues addressed in this article, researchers can use this approach successfully.
Authors: Gregor Reid; Estelle Gaudier; Francisco Guarner; Gary B Huffnagle; Jean M Macklaim; Alicia M Munoz; Margaret Martini; Tamar Ringel-Kulka; Balfour Sartor; Robert Unal; Kristin Verbeke; Jens Walter Journal: Gut Microbes Date: 2010 May-Jun
Authors: Lyvonne N Tume; Kerry Woolfall; Barbara Arch; Louise Roper; Elizabeth Deja; Ashley P Jones; Lynne Latten; Nazima Pathan; Helen Eccleson; Helen Hickey; Roger Parslow; Jennifer Preston; Anne Beissel; Izabela Andrzejewska; Chris Gale; Frederic V Valla; Jon Dorling Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Nick Verhaeghe; Jan De Maeseneer; Lea Maes; Cornelis Van Heeringen; Veerle Bogaert; Els Clays; Dirk De Bacquer; Lieven Annemans Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Kathleen Clouston; Alan Katz; Patricia J Martens; Jeff Sisler; Donna Turner; Michelle Lobchuk; Susan McClement Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Nick Verhaeghe; Els Clays; Carine Vereecken; Jan De Maeseneer; Lea Maes; Cornelis Van Heeringen; Dirk De Bacquer; Lieven Annemans Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Margaret Williamson; Magnolia Cardona-Morrell; Jeffrey D Elliott; James F Reeve; Nigel P Stocks; Jon Emery; Judith M Mackson; Jane M Gunn Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2012-08-23 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Kathleen Clouston; Alan Katz; Patricia J Martens; Jeff Sisler; Donna Turner; Michelle Lobchuk; Susan McClement; Gary Crow Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 4.430