Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28270224›Full record

ArticleTrials2017

An imbalance in cluster sizes does not lead to notable loss of power in cross-sectional, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials with a continuous outcome.

Caroline A Kristunas, Karen L Smith, Laura J Gray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Caroline A KristunasDiabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. cak21@le.ac.uk.
Karen L SmithDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Laura J GrayDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current methodology for sample size calculations for stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials (SW-CRTs) is based on the assumption of equal cluster sizes. However, as is often the case in cluster randomised trials (CRTs), the clusters in SW-CRTs are likely to vary in size, which in other designs of CRT leads to a reduction in power. The effect of an imbalance in cluster size on the power of SW-CRTs has not previously been reported, nor what an appropriate adjustment to the sample size calculation should be to allow for any imbalance. We aimed to assess the impact of an imbalance in cluster size on the power of a cross-sectional SW-CRT and recommend a method for calculating the sample size of a SW-CRT when there is an imbalance in cluster size.

methodsThe effect of varying degrees of imbalance in cluster size on the power of SW-CRTs was investigated using simulations. The sample size was calculated using both the standard method and two proposed adjusted design effects (DEs), based on those suggested for CRTs with unequal cluster sizes. The data were analysed using generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation matrix and robust standard errors.

resultsAn imbalance in cluster size was not found to have a notable effect on the power of SW-CRTs. The two proposed adjusted DEs resulted in trials that were generally considerably over-powered.

conclusionsWe recommend that the standard method of sample size calculation for SW-CRTs be used, provided that the assumptions of the method hold. However, it would be beneficial to investigate, through simulation, what effect the maximum likely amount of inequality in cluster sizes would be on the power of the trial and whether any inflation of the sample size would be required.

Indexed as

Research DesignSample SizeCluster AnalysisComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCluster randomised trialPowerSample sizeSimulation studyStepped wedgeStudy design

Identifiers

PMID28270224
PMCPMC5341460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.