ReviewTrials2017
Stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial designs: a review of reporting quality and design features.
Review in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Reported problems and responses during the conduct of stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials in healthcare settings: a qualitative systematic review.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Pooled it
- The current use of feasibility studies in the assessment of feasibility for stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Pooled it
- Unequal cluster sizes in stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Community Readiness Model Applied in Older Adults for the Promotion of Digital Cognitive Training: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR aging · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Evaluating an early childhood caries prevention strategy: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Inference for the treatment effect in staircase designs with continuous outcomes: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- The relative efficiency of staircase and stepped wedge cluster randomised trial designs.Statistical methods in medical research · 2025Article
- Efficient designs for three-sequence stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Article
- Reduced antimicrobial use in weaned pigs through an intervention program supporting veterinarians' adherence to the clinical practice Streptococcus suis guideline.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Adherence to key recommendations for design and analysis of stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials: A review of trials published 2016-2022.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Review
- Article
- Assessing exposure-time treatment effect heterogeneity in stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials.Biometrics · 2023Article
- Article
- Power analyses for stepped wedge designs with multivariate continuous outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2023Article
- A general method for calculating power for GEE analysis of complete and incomplete stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Article
- power swgee: GEE-based power calculations in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.The Stata journal · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe stepped wedge (SW) cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design is being used with increasing frequency. However, there is limited published research on the quality of reporting of SW-CRCTs. We address this issue by conducting a literature review.
methodsMedline, Ovid, Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, the ISRCTN registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify investigations employing the SW-CRCT design up to February 2015. For each included completed study, information was extracted on a selection of criteria, based on the CONSORT extension to CRCTs, to assess the quality of reporting.
resultsA total of 123 studies were included in our review, of which 39 were completed trial reports. The standard of reporting of SW-CRCTs varied in quality. The percentage of trials reporting each criterion varied to as low as 15.4%, with a median of 66.7%.
conclusionsThere is much room for improvement in the quality of reporting of SW-CRCTs. This is consistent with recent findings for CRCTs. A CONSORT extension for SW-CRCTs is warranted to standardize the reporting of SW-CRCTs.
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.