Literature DB >> 28786223

An evaluation of constrained randomization for the design and analysis of group-randomized trials with binary outcomes.

Fan Li1,2, Elizabeth L Turner1,3, Patrick J Heagerty4, David M Murray5, William M Vollmer6, Elizabeth R DeLong1,2.   

Abstract

Group-randomized trials are randomized studies that allocate intact groups of individuals to different comparison arms. A frequent practical limitation to adopting such research designs is that only a limited number of groups may be available, and therefore, simple randomization is unable to adequately balance multiple group-level covariates between arms. Therefore, covariate-based constrained randomization was proposed as an allocation technique to achieve balance. Constrained randomization involves generating a large number of possible allocation schemes, calculating a balance score that assesses covariate imbalance, limiting the randomization space to a prespecified percentage of candidate allocations, and randomly selecting one scheme to implement. When the outcome is binary, a number of statistical issues arise regarding the potential advantages of such designs in making inference. In particular, properties found for continuous outcomes may not directly apply, and additional variations on statistical tests are available. Motivated by two recent trials, we conduct a series of Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the statistical properties of model-based and randomization-based tests under both simple and constrained randomization designs, with varying degrees of analysis-based covariate adjustment. Our results indicate that constrained randomization improves the power of the linearization F-test, the KC-corrected GEE t-test (Kauermann and Carroll, 2001, Journal of the American Statistical Association 96, 1387-1396), and two permutation tests when the prognostic group-level variables are controlled for in the analysis and the size of randomization space is reasonably small. We also demonstrate that constrained randomization reduces power loss from redundant analysis-based adjustment for non-prognostic covariates. Design considerations such as the choice of the balance metric and the size of randomization space are discussed.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  constrained randomization; generalized estimating equations; generalized linear mixed model; group-randomized trial; permutation test

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28786223      PMCID: PMC5624845          DOI: 10.1002/sim.7410

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


  30 in total

1.  A covariance estimator for GEE with improved small-sample properties.

Authors:  L A Mancl; T A DeRouen
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  A comparison of permutation and mixed-model regression methods for the analysis of simulated data in the context of a group-randomized trial.

Authors:  David M Murray; Peter J Hannan; Sherri P Pals; Richard G McCowen; William L Baker; Jonathan L Blitstein
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  A comparison of two bias-corrected covariance estimators for generalized estimating equations.

Authors:  Bing Lu; John S Preisser; Bahjat F Qaqish; Chirayath Suchindran; Shrikant I Bangdiwala; Mark Wolfson
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  On small-sample inference in group randomized trials with binary outcomes and cluster-level covariates.

Authors:  Philip M Westgate
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 2.207

Review 5.  Stratified randomization for clinical trials.

Authors:  W N Kernan; C M Viscoli; R W Makuch; L M Brass; R I Horwitz
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 6.  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

7.  Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trials Using Covariate Constrained Randomization: A Method for Practice-based Research Networks (PBRNs).

Authors:  L Miriam Dickinson; Brenda Beaty; Chet Fox; Wilson Pace; W Perry Dickinson; Caroline Emsermann; Allison Kempe
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.657

8.  How to select covariates to include in the analysis of a clinical trial.

Authors:  G M Raab; S Day; J Sales
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-08

9.  Strategies and Opportunities to STOP Colon Cancer in Priority Populations: design of a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial.

Authors:  Gloria D Coronado; William M Vollmer; Amanda Petrik; Stephen H Taplin; Timothy E Burdick; Richard T Meenan; Beverly B Green
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 10.  Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review.

Authors:  Noah M Ivers; Ilana J Halperin; Jan Barnsley; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Baiju R Shah; Karen Tu; Ross Upshur; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  22 in total

1.  Impact of baseline covariate imbalance on bias in treatment effect estimation in cluster randomized trials: Race as an example.

Authors:  Siyun Yang; Monique Anderson Starks; Adrian F Hernandez; Elizabeth L Turner; Robert M Califf; Christopher M O'Connor; Robert J Mentz; Kingshuk Roy Choudhury
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  Commentary: Right truncation in cluster randomized trials can attenuate the power of a marginal analysis.

Authors:  Fan Li; Michael O Harhay
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 7.196

3.  Sample size requirements for detecting treatment effect heterogeneity in cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Siyun Yang; Fan Li; Monique A Starks; Adrian F Hernandez; Robert J Mentz; Kingshuk R Choudhury
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Constrained randomization and statistical inference for multi-arm parallel cluster randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Yunji Zhou; Elizabeth L Turner; Ryan A Simmons; Fan Li
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Design and analysis considerations for cohort stepped wedge cluster randomized trials with a decay correlation structure.

Authors:  Fan Li
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Power and sample size requirements for GEE analyses of cluster randomized crossover trials.

Authors:  Fan Li; Andrew B Forbes; Elizabeth L Turner; John S Preisser
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Peer Counseling Promotes Appropriate Infant Feeding Practices and Improves Infant Growth and Development in an Urban Slum in Bangladesh: A Community-Based Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Gulshan Ara; Mansura Khanam; Nowshin Papri; Baitun Nahar; Iqbal Kabir; Kazi Istiaque Sanin; Sihan Sadat Khan; Md Shafiqul Alam Sarker; Michael J Dibley
Journal:  Curr Dev Nutr       Date:  2019-06-18

8.  xtgeebcv: A command for bias-corrected sandwich variance estimation for GEE analyses of cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  John A Gallis; Fan Li; Elizabeth L Turner
Journal:  Stata J       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 2.637

9.  Randomization-based inference for a marginal treatment effect in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Dustin J Rabideau; Rui Wang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 2.497

10.  Sample size estimation for modified Poisson analysis of cluster randomized trials with a binary outcome.

Authors:  Fan Li; Guangyu Tong
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 2.494

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.