ArticleTrials2012
Clustering in surgical trials--database of intracluster correlations.
Article in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis for patients aged 50-85 years with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis: the TARVA RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review of the use of an expertise-based randomised controlled trial design.Trials · 2015Pooled it
- Expertise-based design in surgical trials: a narrative review.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgiePooled it
- Comparison of surgical or non-surgical management for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury: the ACL SNNAP RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy for Cervical Brachialgia: the FORVAD RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Surgical fixation with K-wires versus casting in adults with fracture of distal radius: DRAFFT2 multicentre randomised clinical trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Trial
- Assessment of Non-cultured Autologous Epidermal Cell Grafting Resuspended in Hyaluronic Acid for Repigmenting Vitiligo and Piebaldism Lesions: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Electrophysiology procedures for preventing falls in older people living in the community.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Sample size calculations for pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial: a review 2010-2020.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Review
- Article
- Sample Size Calculations for Partially Clustered Trials.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- The Doctors' Effect on Patients' Physical Health Outcomes Beyond the Intervention: A Methodological Review.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Statistical considerations for repeatability and reproducibility of quantitative imaging biomarkers.BJR open · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRandomised trials evaluation of surgical interventions are often designed and analysed as if the outcome of individual patients is independent of the surgeon providing the intervention. There is reason to expect outcomes for patients treated by the same surgeon tend to be more similar than those under the care of another surgeon due to previous experience, individual practice, training, and infrastructure. Such a phenomenon is referred to as the clustering effect and potentially impacts on the design and analysis adopted and thereby the required sample size. The aim of this work was to inform trial design by quantifying clustering effects (at both centre and surgeon level) for various outcomes using a database of surgical trials.
methodsIntracluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for outcomes from a set of 10 multicentre surgical trials for a range of outcomes and different time points for clustering at both the centre and surgeon level.
resultsICCs were calculated for 198 outcomes across the 10 trials at both centre and surgeon cluster levels. The number of cases varied from 138 to 1370 across the trials. The median (range) average cluster size was 32 (9 to 51) and 6 (3 to 30) for centre and surgeon levels respectively. ICC estimates varied substantially between outcome type though uncertainty around individual ICC estimates was substantial, which was reflected in generally wide confidence intervals.
conclusionsThis database of surgical trials provides trialists with valuable information on how to design surgical trials. Our data suggests clustering of outcome is more of an issue than has been previously acknowledged. We anticipate that over time the addition of ICCs from further surgical trial datasets to our database will further inform the design of surgical trials.
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.