Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31797438›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2020

Design and analysis considerations for cohort stepped wedge cluster randomized trials with a decay correlation structure.

Fan Li

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Model-robust standardization in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. How should a cluster randomized trial be analyzed?Journal of epidemiology and population health · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Generalizing the information content for stepped wedge designs: A marginal modeling approach.Scandinavian journal of statistics, theory and applications · 2023
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fan LiDepartment of Biostatistics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.ORCID 0000-0001-6183-1893
Yale University · US

Funding

NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory-Coordinating Center (U24)U24AT009676 · NCCIH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LESLEY H CURTIS, Adrian Hernandez · 2017 to 2026
$21.5M
EMBED: Pragmatic trial of user-centered clinical decision support to implement EMergency department-initiated BuprenorphinE for opioid use DisorderUH3DA047003 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI D'ONOFRIO, GAIL, MELNICK, EDWARD ROBERT · 2019 to 2022
$7.2M
NCCIH NIH HHS U24 AT009676NIDA NIH HHS UH3 DA047003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A stepped wedge cluster randomized trial is a type of longitudinal cluster design that sequentially switches clusters to intervention over time until all clusters are treated. While the traditional posttest-only parallel design requires adjustment for a single intraclass correlation coefficient, the stepped wedge design allows multiple outcome measurements from the same cluster and so additional correlation parameters are necessary to characterize the within-cluster correlation structure. Although a number of studies have differentiated between the concepts of within-period and between-period correlations, only a few studies have allowed the between-period correlation to decay over time. In this article, we consider the proportional decay correlation structure for a cohort stepped wedge design, and provide a matrix-adjusted quasi-least squares approach to accurately estimate the correlation parameters along with the marginal intervention effect. We further develop the sample size and power procedures accounting for the correlation decay, and investigate the accuracy of the power procedure with continuous outcomes in a simulation study. We show that the empirical power agrees well with the prediction even with as few as nine clusters, when data are analyzed with matrix-adjusted quasi-least squares concurrently with a suitable bias-corrected sandwich variance. Two trial examples are provided to illustrate the new sample size procedure.

Indexed as

Research DesignCluster AnalysisCohort StudiesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSample Sizefinite-sample correctiongeneralized estimating equations (GEEs)group-randomized trialproportional decayquasi-least squares (QLS)sample size calculation

Identifiers

PMID31797438
PMCPMC7027591
OpenAlexW2992895611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.