ArticleBMC medical research methodology2010
Electronic search strategies to identify reports of cluster randomized trials in MEDLINE: low precision will improve with adherence to reporting standards.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Characteristics and practices of school-based cluster randomised controlled trials for improving health outcomes in pupils in the United Kingdom: a methodological systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Bayesian statistics in the design and analysis of cluster randomised controlled trials and their reporting quality: a methodological systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Reporting non-adherence in cluster randomised trials: A systematic review.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review of cluster randomised trials in residential facilities for older people suggests how to improve quality.BMC medical research methodology · 2013Pooled it
- Article
- Components of Health Surveillance System in Natural Disasters that Affect Military Health Services: A Systematic Review.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Review
- Identification of the factors affecting the referral system of veterans' health services: A scoping review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Article
- Machine learning algorithms to identify cluster randomized trials from MEDLINE and EMBASE.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Systematic review of the characteristics of school-based feasibility cluster randomised trials of interventions for improving the health of pupils in the UK.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Review
- Article
- Review
- An evaluation of DistillerSR's machine learning-based prioritization tool for title/abstract screening - impact on reviewer-relevant outcomes.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- The Method of Randomization for Cluster-Randomized Trials: Challenges of Including Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions.International journal of statistics in medical research · 2016Article
- Mail merge can be used to create personalized questionnaires in complex surveys.BMC research notes · 2015Article
- A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2015Review
- A brief history of the cluster randomised trial design.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCluster randomized trials (CRTs) present unique methodological and ethical challenges. Researchers conducting systematic reviews of CRTs (e.g., addressing methodological or ethical issues) require efficient electronic search strategies (filters or hedges) to identify trials in electronic databases such as MEDLINE. According to the CONSORT statement extension to CRTs, the clustered design should be clearly identified in titles or abstracts; however, variability in terminology may make electronic identification challenging. Our objectives were to (a) evaluate sensitivity ("recall") and precision of a well-known electronic search strategy ("randomized controlled trial" as publication type) with respect to identifying CRTs, (b) evaluate the feasibility of new search strategies targeted specifically at CRTs, and (c) determine whether CRTs are appropriately identified in titles or abstracts of reports and whether there has been improvement over time.
methodsWe manually examined a wide range of health journals to identify a gold standard set of CRTs. Search strategies were evaluated against the gold standard set, as well as an independent set of CRTs included in previous systematic reviews.
resultsThe existing strategy (randomized controlled trial.pt) is sensitive (93.8%) for identifying CRTs, but has relatively low precision (9%, number needed to read 11); the number needed to read can be halved to 5 (precision 18.4%) by combining with cluster design-related terms using the Boolean operator AND; combining with the Boolean operator OR maximizes sensitivity (99.4%) but would require 28.6 citations read to identify one CRT. Only about 50% of CRTs are clearly identified as cluster randomized in titles or abstracts; approximately 25% can be identified based on the reported units of randomization but are not amenable to electronic searching; the remaining 25% cannot be identified except through manual inspection of the full-text article. The proportion of trials clearly identified has increased from 28% between the years 2000-2003, to 60% between 2004-2007 (absolute increase 32%, 95% CI 17 to 47%).
conclusionsCRTs should include the phrase "cluster randomized trial" in titles or abstracts; this will facilitate more accurate indexing of the publication type by reviewers at the National Library of Medicine, and efficient textword retrieval of the subset employing cluster randomization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.