ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2023
Improving sandwich variance estimation for marginal Cox analysis of cluster randomized trials.
Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term mortality outcome of a primary care-based mobile health intervention for stroke management: Six-year follow-up of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2025Trial
- Estimands and Doubly Robust Estimation for Cluster-Randomized Trials With Survival Outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Power calculation for cross-sectional stepped wedge cluster randomized trials with a time-to-event endpoint.Biometrics · 2025Article
- A Variance Estimator for Marginal Cox Regression Models Fit to Non-Nested Multilevel Data.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Quantifying the Impact of Co-Housing on Murine Aging Studies.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Methods for the estimation of direct and indirect vaccination effects by combining data from individual- and cluster-randomized trials.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Simulating time-to-event data subject to competing risks and clustering: A review and synthesis.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Review
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
Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) frequently recruit a small number of clusters, therefore necessitating the application of small-sample corrections for valid inference. A recent systematic review indicated that CRTs reporting right-censored, time-to-event outcomes are not uncommon and that the marginal Cox proportional hazards model is one of the common approaches used for primary analysis. While small-sample corrections have been studied under marginal models with continuous, binary, and count outcomes, no prior research has been devoted to the development and evaluation of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators when clustered time-to-event outcomes are analyzed by the marginal Cox model. To improve current practice, we propose nine bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators for the analysis of CRTs using the marginal Cox model and report on a simulation study to evaluate their small-sample properties. Our results indicate that the optimal choice of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator for CRTs with survival outcomes can depend on the variability of cluster sizes and can also slightly differ whether it is evaluated according to relative bias or type I error rate. Finally, we illustrate the new variance estimators in a real-world CRT where the conclusion about intervention effectiveness differs depending on the use of small-sample bias corrections. The proposed sandwich variance estimators are implemented in an R package CoxBcv.
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.