ArticleStatistics in medicine2016
Statistical efficiency and optimal design for stepped cluster studies under linear mixed effects models.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 85 papers.
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.
Building and Sustaining Interventions for Children (BASIC): Task-sharing Mental Health Care in Low-resource Settings
A Proposal to Establish the Mississippi Violence Injury Prevention (VIP) Program
Who cites it
85 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation and Effectiveness of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol for Children Undergoing Surgery: The ENRICH-US Stepped-Wedge Cluster-Randomized Trial.JAMA surgery · 2026Trial
- Let's TOC Fertility: A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial of the Telehealth Oncofertility Care (TOC) intervention in children, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors.Contemporary clinical trials · 2024Trial
- Does it decay? Obtaining decaying correlation parameter values from previously analysed cluster randomised trials.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Trial
- Optimal allocation to treatment sequences in individually randomized stepped-wedge designs with attrition.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Which Small-Sample Correction Should be Used When Analyzing Stepped-Wedge Designs With Time-Varying Treatment Effects?Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Comparing meta-analysis and linear mixed model-based approaches for the analysis of continuous outcomes from batched stepped wedge trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Factors affecting power in stepped wedge trials when the treatment effect varies with time.Trials · 2026Article
- Methodology for the Pediatric Dose Optimization for Seizures in Emergency Medical Services (PediDOSE) study.Trials · 2025Article
- What scientific inferences can be made with randomized implementation rollout trials.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Selecting the optimal longitudinal cluster randomized design with a continuous outcome: Parallel-arm, crossover, or stepped-wedge.Statistical methods in medical research · 2025Article
- Analysis of Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trials When Treatment Effects Vary by Exposure Time or Calendar Time.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Designing Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trials With a Baseline Measurement of the Outcome.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Grand rounds in methodology: improving the design of staggered implementation cluster randomised trials.BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- Optimal Allocation of Observations in Stepped-Wedge and Other Cluster Studies With Correlated Cluster-Period Effects.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- How Should Parallel Cluster Randomized Trials With a Baseline Period be Analyzed?-A Survey of Estimands and Common Estimators.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025Article
- Article
- Inference for the treatment effect in staircase designs with continuous outcomes: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In stepped cluster designs the intervention is introduced into some (or all) clusters at different times and persists until the end of the study. Instances include traditional parallel cluster designs and the more recent stepped-wedge designs. We consider the precision offered by such designs under mixed-effects models with fixed time and random subject and cluster effects (including interactions with time), and explore the optimal choice of uptake times. The results apply both to cross-sectional studies where new subjects are observed at each time-point, and longitudinal studies with repeat observations on the same subjects. The efficiency of the design is expressed in terms of a 'cluster-mean correlation' which carries information about the dependency-structure of the data, and two design coefficients which reflect the pattern of uptake-times. In cross-sectional studies the cluster-mean correlation combines information about the cluster-size and the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. A formula is given for the 'design effect' in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. An algorithm for optimising the choice of uptake times is described and specific results obtained for the best balanced stepped designs. In large studies we show that the best design is a hybrid mixture of parallel and stepped-wedge components, with the proportion of stepped wedge clusters equal to the cluster-mean correlation. The impact of prior uncertainty in the cluster-mean correlation is considered by simulation. Some specific hybrid designs are proposed for consideration when the cluster-mean correlation cannot be reliably estimated, using a minimax principle to ensure acceptable performance across the whole range of unknown values. © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
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.