Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146788›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2022

Constrained randomization and statistical inference for multi-arm parallel cluster randomized controlled trials.

Yunji Zhou, Elizabeth L Turner, Ryan A Simmons, Fan Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. COADVISE: covariate adjustment with variable selection in randomized controlled trials.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Yunji ZhouDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3610-9257
Elizabeth L TurnerDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Ryan A SimmonsDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Fan LiDepartment of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6183-1893

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Support for QA/QC for Prior Approval ProcessUL1TR002553 · NCATS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LI, JENNIFER S, MCNAMARA, JAMES O. · 2018 to 2023
$58.5M
Malaria diagnostic testing and conditional subsidies to target ACTs in the retail sector: the TESTsmART trialR01AI141444 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI PRUDHOMMEOMEARA, WENDY · 2018 to 2022
$3.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002553NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI141444
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A practical limitation of cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) is that the number of available clusters may be small, resulting in an increased risk of baseline imbalance under simple randomization. Constrained randomization overcomes this issue by restricting the allocation to a subset of randomization schemes where sufficient overall covariate balance across comparison arms is achieved. However, for multi-arm cRCTs, several design and analysis issues pertaining to constrained randomization have not been fully investigated. Motivated by an ongoing multi-arm cRCT, we elaborate the method of constrained randomization and provide a comprehensive evaluation of the statistical properties of model-based and randomization-based tests under both simple and constrained randomization designs in multi-arm cRCTs, with varying combinations of design and analysis-based covariate adjustment strategies. In particular, as randomization-based tests have not been extensively studied in multi-arm cRCTs, we additionally develop most-powerful randomization tests under the linear mixed model framework for our comparisons. Our results indicate that under constrained randomization, both model-based and randomization-based analyses could gain power while preserving nominal type I error rate, given proper analysis-based adjustment for the baseline covariates. Randomization-based analyses, however, are more robust against violations of distributional assumptions. The choice of balance metrics and candidate set sizes and their implications on the testing of the pairwise and global hypotheses are also discussed. Finally, we caution against the design and analysis of multi-arm cRCTs with an extremely small number of clusters, due to insufficient degrees of freedom and the tendency to obtain an overly restricted randomization space.

Indexed as

Research DesignCluster AnalysisHumansRandom AllocationRandomized Controlled Trials as Topiccluster randomized trialscovariate adjustmentlinear mixed modelsmost-powerful randomization testmulti-arm trialrestricted randomization

Identifiers

PMID35146788
PMCPMC9007899

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.