Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31876979›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2020

Novel methods for the analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.

Lee Kennedy-Shaffer, Victor de Gruttola, Marc Lipsitch

Abstract 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 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Lee Kennedy-ShafferDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0001-7604-3638
Victor de GruttolaDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Marc LipsitchDepartment of Epidemiology and Department of Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0003-1504-9213

Funding

Understanding and controlling antibiotic resistanceU54GM088558 · NIGMS · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI LIPSITCH, MARC · 2009 to 2018
$26.4M
BIOSTATISTICS/EPIDEMIOLOGY TRAINING GRANTS IN AIDST32AI007358 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Michael David Hughes · 1989 to 2026
$12.4M
Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases and BiodefenseT32AI007535 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI GRAD, YONATAN H, MURRAY, MEGAN B · 1998 to 2025
$4.8M
Methods to Advance the HIV Prevention Research AgendaR37AI051164 · NIAID · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI DEGRUTTOLA, VICTOR GERARD · 2012 to 2019
$3.3M
Biostatistical Methods for Infectious Diseases Study DesignF31AI147745 · NIAID · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI KENNEDY-SHAFFER, LEE · 2019 to 2019
$30k
NIAID NIH HHS F31 AI147745NIAID NIH HHS R37 AI051164NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007358NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007535NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM088558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stepped wedge cluster randomized trials (SW-CRTs) have become increasingly popular and are used for a variety of interventions and outcomes, often chosen for their feasibility advantages. SW-CRTs must account for time trends in the outcome because of the staggered rollout of the intervention. Robust inference procedures and nonparametric analysis methods have recently been proposed to handle such trends without requiring strong parametric modeling assumptions, but these are less powerful than model-based approaches. We propose several novel analysis methods that reduce reliance on modeling assumptions while preserving some of the increased power provided by the use of mixed effects models. In one method, we use the synthetic control approach to find the best matching clusters for a given intervention cluster. Another method makes use of within-cluster crossover information to construct an overall estimator. We also consider methods that combine these approaches to further improve power. We test these methods on simulated SW-CRTs, describing scenarios in which these methods have increased power compared with existing nonparametric methods while preserving nominal validity when mixed effects models are misspecified. We also demonstrate theoretical properties of these estimators with less restrictive assumptions than mixed effects models. Finally, we propose avenues for future research on the use of these methods; motivation for such research arises from their flexibility, which allows the identification of specific causal contrasts of interest, their robustness, and the potential for incorporating covariates to further increase power. Investigators conducting SW-CRTs might well consider such methods when common modeling assumptions may not hold.

Indexed as

Research DesignCluster AnalysisCross-Over StudiesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topiccluster randomized trialsmixed effects modelspermutation testsstepped wedgesynthetic control

Identifiers

PMID31876979
PMCPMC7247054

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.