Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28653550›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2017

Group sequential designs for stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials.

Michael J Grayling, James Ms Wason, Adrian P Mander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Michael J GraylingMRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK.
James Ms WasonMRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK.
Adrian P ManderMRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0800860Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/2Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/6Medical Research Council MR/N028171/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial design has received substantial attention in recent years. Although various extensions to the original design have been proposed, no guidance is available on the design of stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials with interim analyses. In an individually randomised trial setting, group sequential methods can provide notable efficiency gains and ethical benefits. We address this by discussing how established group sequential methodology can be adapted for stepped-wedge designs.

methodsUtilising the error spending approach to group sequential trial design, we detail the assumptions required for the determination of stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials with interim analyses. We consider early stopping for efficacy, futility, or efficacy and futility. We describe first how this can be done for any specified linear mixed model for data analysis. We then focus on one particular commonly utilised model and, using a recently completed stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial, compare the performance of several designs with interim analyses to the classical stepped-wedge design. Finally, the performance of a quantile substitution procedure for dealing with the case of unknown variance is explored.

resultsWe demonstrate that the incorporation of early stopping in stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial designs could reduce the expected sample size under the null and alternative hypotheses by up to 31% and 22%, respectively, with no cost to the trial's type-I and type-II error rates. The use of restricted error maximum likelihood estimation was found to be more important than quantile substitution for controlling the type-I error rate.

conclusionThe addition of interim analyses into stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials could help guard against time-consuming trials conducted on poor performing treatments and also help expedite the implementation of efficacious treatments. In future, trialists should consider incorporating early stopping of some kind into stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials according to the needs of the particular trial.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicEndpoint DeterminationHumansLinear ModelsMedical FutilityPatient SelectionResearch DesignSample SizeTreatment Outcomecluster randomised trialerror spendinggroup sequentialinterim analysesStepped wedge

Identifiers

PMID28653550
PMCPMC5632563

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.