OBJECTIVES: Multiple baseline designs (MBDs) have been suggested as alternatives to group-randomized trials (GRT). We reviewed structural features of MBDs and considered their potential effectiveness in public health research. We also reviewed the effect of staggered starts on statistical power. METHODS: We reviewed the MBD literature to identify key structural features, recent suggestions that MBDs be adopted in public health research, and the literature on power in GRTs with staggered starts. We also computed power for MBDs and GRTs. RESULTS: The features that have contributed to the success of small MBDs in some fields are not likely to translate well to public health research. MBDs can be more powerful than GRTs under some conditions, but those conditions involve assumptions that require careful evaluation in practice. CONCLUSIONS: MBDs will often serve better as a complement of rather than as an alternative to GRTs. GRTs may employ staggered starts for logistical or ethical reasons, but this will always increase their duration and will often increase their cost.
OBJECTIVES: Multiple baseline designs (MBDs) have been suggested as alternatives to group-randomized trials (GRT). We reviewed structural features of MBDs and considered their potential effectiveness in public health research. We also reviewed the effect of staggered starts on statistical power. METHODS: We reviewed the MBD literature to identify key structural features, recent suggestions that MBDs be adopted in public health research, and the literature on power in GRTs with staggered starts. We also computed power for MBDs and GRTs. RESULTS: The features that have contributed to the success of small MBDs in some fields are not likely to translate well to public health research. MBDs can be more powerful than GRTs under some conditions, but those conditions involve assumptions that require careful evaluation in practice. CONCLUSIONS: MBDs will often serve better as a complement of rather than as an alternative to GRTs. GRTs may employ staggered starts for logistical or ethical reasons, but this will always increase their duration and will often increase their cost.
Authors: David W Dowdy; Jonathan E Golub; Valeria Saraceni; Lawrence H Moulton; Solange C Cavalcante; Silvia Cohn; Antonio G Pacheco; Richard E Chaisson; Betina Durovni Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Stefan Wellek; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff; Jochem König; Philipp Mildenberger; Maria Blettner Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Bruce A Dye; Deborah G Duran; David M Murray; John W Creswell; Patrick Richard; Tilda Farhat; Nancy Breen; Michael M Engelgau Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Philip Zazove; Melissa A Plegue; Michael M McKee; Melissa DeJonckheere; Paul R Kileny; Lauren S Schleicher; Lee A Green; Ananda Sen; Mary E Rapai; Elie Mulhem Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: June Stevens; Charlotte Pratt; Josephine Boyington; Cheryl Nelson; Kimberly P Truesdale; Dianne S Ward; Leslie Lytle; Nancy E Sherwood; Thomas N Robinson; Shirley Moore; Shari Barkin; Ying Kuen Cheung; David M Murray Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-10-26 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Andrea J Cook; Elizabeth Delong; David M Murray; William M Vollmer; Patrick J Heagerty Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2016-05-13 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: David M Murray; Sherri L Pals; Stephanie M George; Andrey Kuzmichev; Gabriel Y Lai; Jocelyn A Lee; Ranell L Myles; Shakira M Nelson Journal: Prev Med Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 4.018