ArticleStatistics in medicine2020
Novel methods for the analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors affecting power in stepped wedge trials when the treatment effect varies with time.Trials · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of a Pharmacist-Led Grid-Based Stewardship Program on the Association Between Antimicrobial Use and Resistance: A 7.5-Year Interrupted Time-Series Analysis in a Chinese Tertiary Hospital.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Maintaining the validity of inference from linear mixed models in stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials under misspecified random-effects structures.Statistical methods in medical research · 2024Article
- Robust analysis of stepped wedge trials using composite likelihood models.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Quasi-experimental methods for pharmacoepidemiology: difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods with case studies for vaccine evaluation.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Comparing analytical strategies for balancing site-level characteristics in stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials in the presence of a time-varying treatment effect.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trials: A Methodological Overview.World neurosurgery · 2022Review
- Randomization-based inference for a marginal treatment effect in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Improving efficiency in the stepped-wedge trial design via Bayesian modeling with an informative prior for the time effects.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2021Article
- Accounting for confounding by time, early intervention adoption, and time-varying effect modification in the design and analysis of stepped-wedge designs: application to a proposed study design to reduce opioid-related mortality.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Cutting edge or blunt instrument: how to decide if a stepped wedge design is right for you.BMJ quality & safety · 2021Review
- Mixed-effects models for the design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials: An overview.Statistical methods in medical research · 2021Review
- The hunt for efficient, incomplete designs for stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Article
- Statistical Properties of Stepped Wedge Cluster-Randomized Trials in Infectious Disease Outbreaks.American journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Accounting for external factors and early intervention adoption in the design and analysis of stepped-wedge designs: Application to a proposed study design to reduce opioid-related mortality.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.