Literature DB >> 22049087

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

Catherine M Crespi1, Weng Kee Wong, Sheng Wu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Power and sample size calculations for cluster randomized trials require prediction of the degree of correlation that will be realized among outcomes of participants in the same cluster. This correlation is typically quantified as the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), defined as the Pearson correlation between two members of the same cluster or proportion of the total variance attributable to variance between clusters. It is widely known but perhaps not fully appreciated that for binary outcomes, the ICC is a function of outcome prevalence. Hence, the ICC and the outcome prevalence are intrinsically related, making the ICC poorly generalizable across study conditions and between studies with different outcome prevalences.
METHODS: We use a simple parametrization of the ICC that aims to isolate that part of the ICC that measures dependence among responses within a cluster from the outcome prevalence. We incorporate this parametrization into sample size calculations for cluster randomized trials and compare our method to the traditional approach using the ICC.
RESULTS: Our dependence parameter, R, may be less influenced by outcome prevalence and has an intuitive meaning that facilitates interpretation. Estimates of R from previous studies can be obtained using simple statistics. Comparison of methods showed that the traditional ICC approach to sample size determination tends to overpower studies under many scenarios, calling for more clusters than truly required. LIMITATIONS: The methods are developed for equal-sized clusters, whereas cluster size may vary in practice.
CONCLUSIONS: The dependence parameter R is an alternative measure of dependence among binary outcomes in cluster randomized trials that has a number of advantages over the ICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22049087      PMCID: PMC3237741          DOI: 10.1177/1740774511423851

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  25 in total

1.  Intraclass correlation coefficient and outcome prevalence are associated in clustered binary data.

Authors:  M C Gulliford; G Adams; O C Ukoumunne; R Latinovic; S Chinn; M J Campbell
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 2.  Patterns of intra-cluster correlation from primary care research to inform study design and analysis.

Authors:  Geoffrey Adams; Martin C Gulliford; Obioha C Ukoumunne; Sandra Eldridge; Susan Chinn; Michael J Campbell
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Developments in cluster randomized trials and Statistics in Medicine.

Authors:  M J Campbell; A Donner; N Klar
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Sample size for cluster randomized trials: effect of coefficient of variation of cluster size and analysis method.

Authors:  Sandra M Eldridge; Deborah Ashby; Sally Kerry
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 5.  Group cognitive behavioural therapy for schizophrenia: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  R Lawrence; T Bradshaw; H Mairs
Journal:  J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.952

6.  Results of a randomized trial to increase mammogram usage among Samoan women.

Authors:  Shiraz I Mishra; Roshan Bastani; Catherine M Crespi; L Cindy Chang; Pat H Luce; Claudia R Baquet
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a study of ethnically diverse first-degree relatives of CRC cases.

Authors:  Roshan Bastani; Beth A Glenn; Annette E Maxwell; Patricia A Ganz; Cynthia M Mojica; L Cindy Chang
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Randomization by cluster. Sample size requirements and analysis.

Authors:  A Donner; N Birkett; C Buck
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Health care provider-directed intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among veterans: results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  M Rosario Ferreira; Nancy C Dolan; Marian L Fitzgibbon; Terry C Davis; Nicolle Gorby; Lisa Ladewski; Dachao Liu; Alfred W Rademaker; Franklin Medio; Brian P Schmitt; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-03-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Cancer screening for underserved women: the Breast and Cervical Cancer Intervention Study.

Authors:  Robert A Hiatt; Rena J Pasick; Susan Stewart; Joan Bloom; Patricia Davis; Philip Gardiner; Judith Luce
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Comparison of methods for estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient for binary responses in cancer prevention cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Sheng Wu; Catherine M Crespi; Weng Kee Wong
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.226

3.  Cluster Effects in a National Dental PBRN restorative study.

Authors:  M S Litaker; V V Gordan; D B Rindal; J L Fellows; G H Gilbert
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 6.116

4.  Marginal modeling in community randomized trials with rare events: Utilization of the negative binomial regression model.

Authors:  Philip M Westgate; Debbie M Cheng; Daniel J Feaster; Soledad Fernández; Abigail B Shoben; Nathan Vandergrift
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 2.599

5.  Maximin optimal designs for cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Sheng Wu; Weng Kee Wong; Catherine M Crespi
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 1.701

6.  Choosing a Cluster Sampling Design for Lot Quality Assurance Sampling Surveys.

Authors:  Lauren Hund; Edward J Bedrick; Marcello Pagano
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Detailed statistical analysis plan for the difficult airway management (DIFFICAIR) trial.

Authors:  Anders Kehlet Nørskov; Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm; Charlotte Vallentin Rosenstock; Jørn Wetterslev
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.