Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31338480›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2019

Sensitivity of methods for analyzing continuous outcome from stratified cluster randomized trials - an empirical comparison study.

Sayem Borhan, Rizwana Mallick, Mershen Pillay, Harsha Kathard, Lehana Thabane

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03111524 (The Classroom Communication Resource), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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.

NCT03111524 naunknown statusnot on this map

The Classroom Communication Resource (CCR) Intervention to Change Grade 7 Peer's Attitudes Towards Children Who Stutter (CWS) in the Western Cape: A Protocol for a Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorRizwana MallickRan2016 to 2018Enrolled453ConditionsStuttering in Adolescence, Bullying of ChildArmsClassroom Communication Resource, No intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sayem BorhanDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Rizwana MallickUniversity of Cape Town, Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa.
Mershen PillayUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Harsha KathardUniversity of Cape Town, Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa.
Lehana ThabaneDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
University of Cape Town · ZAImpact · CASt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton · CAUniversity of KwaZulu-Natal · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The assessment of the sensitivity of statistical methods has received little attention in cluster randomized trials (CRTs), especially for stratified CRT when the outcome of interest is continuous. We empirically examined the sensitivity of five methods for analyzing the continuous outcome from a stratified CRT - aimed to investigate the efficacy of the Classroom Communication Resource (CCR) compared to usual care to improve the peer attitude towards children who stutter among grade 7 students. Schools - the clusters, were divided into quintile based on their socio-political resources, and then stratified by quintile. The schools were then randomized to CCR and usual care groups in each stratum. The primary outcome was Stuttering Resource Outcomes Measure. Five methods, including the primary method, were used in this study to examine the effect of CCR. The individual-level methods were: (i) linear regression; (ii) mixed-effects method; (iii) GEE with exchangeable correlation structure (primary method of analysis). And the cluster-level methods were: (iv) cluster-level linear regression; and (v) meta-regression. These methods were also compared with or without adjustment for stratification. Ten schools were stratified by quintile, and then randomized to CCR (223 students) and usual care (231 students) groups. The direction of the estimated differences was same for all the methods except meta-regression. The widths of the 95% confidence intervals were narrower when adjusted for stratification. The overall conclusion from all the methods was similar but slightly differed in terms of effect estimate and widths of confidence intervals. TRIALREGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03111524. Registered on 9 March 2017.

Indexed as

Cluster randomized trialContinuousSensitivity analysisStratification

Identifiers

PMID31338480
PMCPMC6627034
OpenAlexW2956100686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.