Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35780160›Full record

ReviewPilot and feasibility studies2022

Systematic review of the characteristics of school-based feasibility cluster randomised trials of interventions for improving the health of pupils in the UK.

Kitty Parker, Saskia Eddy, Michael Nunns, ZhiMin Xiao, Tamsin Ford, Sandra Eldridge, Obioha C Ukoumunne

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kitty ParkerNIHR Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula, University of Exeter, Room 2.16, South Cloisters, St Luke's Campus, 79 Heavitree Rd, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. kp477@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2319-8227
Saskia EddyWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Michael NunnsCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
ZhiMin XiaoSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Tamsin FordDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Sandra EldridgeWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Obioha C UkoumunneNIHR Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
University of Exeter · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe last 20 years have seen a marked increase in the use of cluster randomised trials (CRTs) in schools to evaluate interventions for improving pupil health outcomes. Schools have limited resources and participating in full-scale trials can be challenging and costly, given their main purpose is education. Feasibility studies can be used to identify challenges with implementing interventions and delivering trials. This systematic review summarises methodological characteristics and objectives of school-based cluster randomised feasibility studies in the United Kingdom (UK).

methodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE from inception to 31 December 2020. Eligible papers were school-based feasibility CRTs that included health outcomes measured on pupils.

resultsOf 3285 articles identified, 24 were included. School-based feasibility CRTs have been increasingly used in the UK since the first publication in 2008. Five (21%) studies provided justification for the use of the CRT design. Three (13%) studies provided details of a formal sample size calculation, with only one of these allowing for clustering. The median (IQR; range) recruited sample size was 7.5 (4.5 to 9; 2 to 37) schools and 274 (179 to 557; 29 to 1567) pupils. The most common feasibility objectives were to estimate the potential effectiveness of the intervention (n = 17; 71%), assess acceptability of the intervention (n = 16; 67%), and estimate the recruitment/retention rates (n = 15; 63%). Only one study was used to assess whether cluster randomisation was appropriate, and none of the studies that randomised clusters before recruiting pupils assessed the possibility of recruitment bias. Besides potential effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, no studies quantified the precision of the feasibility parameter estimates.

conclusionsFeasibility CRTs are increasingly used in schools prior to definitive trials of interventions for improving health in pupils. The average sample size of studies included in this review would be large enough to estimate pupil-level feasibility parameters (e.g., percentage followed up) with reasonable precision. The review highlights the need for clearer sample size justification and better reporting of the precision with which feasibility parameters are estimated. Better use could be made of feasibility CRTs to assess challenges that are specific to the cluster design.

trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42020218993.

Indexed as

ChildrenCluster randomised trialsFeasibility studyPilot studyPublic healthRandomised trialsResearch methodsSchoolsSystematic reviewTrial methodology

Identifiers

PMID35780160
PMCPMC9250211
OpenAlexW4283778977

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.