ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2017
Leveraging contact network structure in the design of cluster randomized trials.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accounting for contact network uncertainty in epidemic inferences with Approximate Bayesian Computation.Applied network science · 2025Article
- Causal Inference for Social Network Data.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2024Article
- A Network Approach to Stroke Systems of Care.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2019Review
- Choices in vaccine trial design in epidemics of emerging infections.PLoS medicine · 2018Article
- Simulations for designing and interpreting intervention trials in infectious diseases.BMC medicine · 2017Article
- Improving vaccine trials in infectious disease emergencies.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Review
- Review of Recent Methodological Developments in Group-Randomized Trials: Part 2-Analysis.American journal of public health · 2017Review
- Review of Recent Methodological Developments in Group-Randomized Trials: Part 1-Design.American journal of public health · 2017Review
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
backgroundIn settings like the Ebola epidemic, where proof-of-principle trials have provided evidence of efficacy but questions remain about the effectiveness of different possible modes of implementation, it may be useful to conduct trials that not only generate information about intervention effects but also themselves provide public health benefit. Cluster randomized trials are of particular value for infectious disease prevention research by virtue of their ability to capture both direct and indirect effects of intervention, the latter of which depends heavily on the nature of contact networks within and across clusters. By leveraging information about these networks-in particular the degree of connection across randomized units, which can be obtained at study baseline-we propose a novel class of connectivity-informed cluster trial designs that aim both to improve public health impact (speed of epidemic control) and to preserve the ability to detect intervention effects.
methodsWe several designs for cluster randomized trials with staggered enrollment, in each of which the order of enrollment is based on the total number of ties (contacts) from individuals within a cluster to individuals in other clusters. Our designs can accommodate connectivity based either on the total number of external connections at baseline or on connections only to areas yet to receive the intervention. We further consider a "holdback" version of the designs in which control clusters are held back from re-randomization for some time interval. We investigate the performance of these designs in terms of epidemic control outcomes (time to end of epidemic and cumulative incidence) and power to detect intervention effect, by simulating vaccination trials during an SEIR-type epidemic outbreak using a network-structured agent-based model. We compare results to those of a traditional Stepped Wedge trial.
resultsIn our simulation studies, connectivity-informed designs lead to a 20% reduction in cumulative incidence compared to comparable traditional study designs, but have little impact on epidemic length. Power to detect intervention effect is reduced in all connectivity-informed designs, but "holdback" versions provide power that is very close to that of a traditional Stepped Wedge approach.
conclusionIncorporating information about cluster connectivity in the design of cluster randomized trials can increase their public health impact, especially in acute outbreak settings. Using this information helps control outbreaks-by minimizing the number of cross-cluster infections-with very modest cost in terms of power to detect effectiveness.
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.