ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs2010
Intraclass correlation estimates for cancer screening outcomes: estimates and applications in the design of group-randomized cancer screening studies.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Single-round performance of colorectal cancer screening programs: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions to increase the uptake of cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Do community health worker interventions improve rates of screening mammography in the United States? A systematic review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2011Pooled it
- Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Determining the sample size for a cluster-randomised trial using knowledge elicitation: Bayesian hierarchical modelling of the intracluster correlation coefficient.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2023Trial
- A web-based personalized risk communication and decision-making tool for women with dense breasts: Design and methods of a randomized controlled trial within an integrated health care system.Contemporary clinical trials · 2017Trial
- A non-randomized controlled stepped wedge trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level mammography intervention in improving appointment adherence in underserved women.Implementation science : IS · 2015Trial
- Comparative effectiveness of audit-feedback versus additional physician communication training to improve cancer screening for patients with limited health literacy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2014Trial
- Effectiveness of a primary care practice intervention for increasing colorectal cancer screening in Appalachian Kentucky.Preventive medicine · 2014Trial
- Cluster Effects in a National Dental PBRN restorative study.Journal of dental research · 2013Trial
- Inter-physician heterogeneity in colorectal cancer screening participation in France: a study based on the French National Health Data System.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Robust Permutation Test of Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for Assessing Agreement.Cancers · 2025Article
- Comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies for Accelerating Cervical Cancer Elimination through the integration of Screen-and-treat Services (ACCESS study): protocol for a cluster randomized hybrid type III trial in Nigeria.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Adapting and implementing breast cancer follow-up in primary care: protocol for a mixed methods hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized study.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Article
- Effect sizes and intra-cluster correlation coefficients measured from the Green Dot High School study for guiding sample size calculations when designing future violence prevention cluster randomized trials in school settings.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2021Article
- Clinical biomarkers for cancer recognition and prevention: A novel approach with optical measurements.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2018Review
- Malaria prevalence metrics in low- and middle-income countries: an assessment of precision in nationally-representative surveys.Malaria journal · 2017Article
- Maximin optimal designs for cluster randomized trials.Biometrics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening has become one of our best tools for early detection and prevention of cancer. The group-randomized trial is the most rigorous experimental design for evaluating multilevel interventions. However, identifying the proper sample size for a group-randomized trial requires reliable estimates of intraclass correlation (ICC) for screening outcomes, which are not available to researchers. We present crude and adjusted ICC estimates for cancer screening outcomes for various levels of aggregation (physician, clinic, and county) and provide an example of how these ICC estimates may be used in the design of a future trial.
methodsInvestigators working in the area of cancer screening were contacted and asked to provide crude and adjusted ICC estimates using the analysis of variance method estimator.
resultsOf the 29 investigators identified, estimates were obtained from 10 investigators who had relevant data. ICC estimates were calculated from 13 different studies, with more than half of the studies collecting information on colorectal screening. In the majority of cases, ICC estimates could be adjusted for age, education, and other demographic characteristics, leading to a reduction in the ICC. ICC estimates varied considerably by cancer site and level of aggregation of the groups.
conclusionsPreviously, only two articles had published ICCs for cancer screening outcomes. We have complied more than 130 crude and adjusted ICC estimates covering breast, cervical, colon, and prostate screening and have detailed them by level of aggregation, screening measure, and study characteristics. We have also demonstrated their use in planning a future trial and the need for the evaluation of the proposed interval estimator for binary outcomes under conditions typically seen in GRTs.
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.