Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33685241›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2021

Optimal design of cluster randomised trials with continuous recruitment and prospective baseline period.

Richard Hooper, Andrew J Copas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors.

Richard HooperCentre for Clinical Trials & Methodology, Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1063-0917
Andrew J CopasMRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8968-5963

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/09Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/29
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCluster randomised trials, like individually randomised trials, may benefit from a baseline period of data collection. We consider trials in which clusters prospectively recruit or identify participants as a continuous process over a given calendar period, and ask whether and for how long investigators should collect baseline data as part of the trial, in order to maximise precision.

methodsWe show how to calculate and plot the variance of the treatment effect estimator for different lengths of baseline period in a range of scenarios, and offer general advice.

resultsIn some circumstances it is optimal not to include a baseline, while in others there is an optimal duration for the baseline. All other things being equal, the circumstances where it is preferable not to include a baseline period are those with a smaller recruitment rate, smaller intracluster correlation, greater decay in the intracluster correlation over time, or wider transition period between recruitment under control and intervention conditions.

conclusionThe variance of the treatment effect estimator can be calculated numerically, and plotted against the duration of baseline to inform design. It would be of interest to extend these investigations to cluster randomised trial designs with more than two randomised sequences of control and intervention condition, including stepped wedge designs.

Indexed as

Data CollectionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignCluster AnalysisHumansPatient SelectionProspective StudiesSample SizeEfficient designgroup randomised trialspowersample size

Identifiers

PMID33685241
PMCPMC8010895

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.