Literature DB >> 31228563

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

Siyun Yang1, Monique Anderson Starks2, Adrian F Hernandez3, Elizabeth L Turner4, Robert M Califf3, Christopher M O'Connor5, Robert J Mentz3, Kingshuk Roy Choudhury1.   

Abstract

Individual-level baseline covariate imbalance could happen more frequently in cluster randomized trials, and may influence the observed treatment effect. Using computer and real-data simulations, this paper quantifies the extent and impact of covariate imbalance on the estimated treatment effect for both continuous and binary outcomes, and relates it to the degree of imbalance for different numbers of clusters, cluster sizes, and covariate intraclass correlation coefficients. We focused on the impact of race as a covariate, given the emphasis of regulatory and funding bodies on understanding the influence of demographic characteristics on treatment effectiveness. We found that bias in the treatment effect is proportional to both the degree of baseline covariate imbalance and the covariate effect size. Larger numbers of clusters result in lower covariate imbalance, and increasing cluster size is less effective in reducing imbalance compared to increasing the number of clusters. Models adjusted for important baseline confounders are superior to unadjusted models for minimizing bias in both model-based simulations and an innovative simulation based on real clinical trial data. Higher outcome intraclass correlation coefficients did not affect bias but resulted in greater variance in treatment estimates.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  (MeSH terms): Bias; Cluster analysis; Multivariable analysis; Randomized controlled trials as topic; Research design

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31228563      PMCID: PMC8337048          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2019.04.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  31 in total

Review 1.  Design and analysis of group-randomized trials in cancer: a review of current practices.

Authors:  David M Murray; Sherri L Pals; Jonathan L Blitstein; Catherine M Alfano; Jennifer Lehman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-03-25       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  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

3.  Race, exercise training, and outcomes in chronic heart failure: findings from Heart Failure - a Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes in Exercise TraiNing (HF-ACTION).

Authors:  Robert J Mentz; Vera Bittner; Phillip J Schulte; Jerome L Fleg; Ileana L Piña; Steven J Keteyian; Gordon Moe; Anil Nigam; Ann M Swank; Anekwe E Onwuanyi; Meredith Fitz-Gerald; Andrew Kao; Stephen J Ellis; William E Kraus; David J Whellan; Christopher M O'Connor
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2013-07-12       Impact factor: 4.749

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

Authors:  Fan Li; Elizabeth L Turner; Patrick J Heagerty; David M Murray; William M Vollmer; Elizabeth R DeLong
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Factors related to morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with systolic dysfunction: the HF-ACTION predictive risk score model.

Authors:  Christopher M O'Connor; David J Whellan; Daniel Wojdyla; Eric Leifer; Robert M Clare; Stephen J Ellis; Lawrence J Fine; Jerome L Fleg; Faiez Zannad; Steven J Keteyian; Dalane W Kitzman; William E Kraus; David Rendall; Ileana L Piña; Lawton S Cooper; Mona Fiuzat; Kerry L Lee
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 8.790

6.  Efficacy and safety of exercise training in patients with chronic heart failure: HF-ACTION randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christopher M O'Connor; David J Whellan; Kerry L Lee; Steven J Keteyian; Lawton S Cooper; Stephen J Ellis; Eric S Leifer; William E Kraus; Dalane W Kitzman; James A Blumenthal; David S Rendall; Nancy Houston Miller; Jerome L Fleg; Kevin A Schulman; Robert S McKelvie; Faiez Zannad; Ileana L Piña
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-04-08       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Ethical and regulatory issues of pragmatic cluster randomized trials in contemporary health systems.

Authors:  Monique L Anderson; Robert M Califf; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-03-01       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  Bias, precision and statistical power of analysis of covariance in the analysis of randomized trials with baseline imbalance: a simulation study.

Authors:  Bolaji E Egbewale; Martyn Lewis; Julius Sim
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 9.  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

10.  Balance algorithm for cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Ben R Carter; Kerenza Hood
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2008-10-09       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Application of randomization techniques for balancing site covariates in the adult day service plus pragmatic cluster-randomized trial.

Authors:  David L Roth; Jin Huang; Laura N Gitlin; Joseph E Gaugler
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2020-07-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.