Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40368384›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2025

Analysis of recurrent events in cluster randomised trials: The PLEASANT trial case study.

Kelly Grant, Steven A Julious

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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.

Kelly GrantNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, The University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5319-8127
Steven A JuliousThe University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recurrent events for many clinical conditions, such as asthma, can indicate poor health outcomes. Recurrent events data are often analysed using statistical methods such as Cox regression or negative binomial regression, suffering event or time information loss. This article re-analyses the preventing and lessening exacerbations of asthma in school-age children associated with a new term (PLEASANT) trial data as a case study, investigating the utility, extending recurrent events survival analysis methods to cluster randomised trials. A conditional frailty model is used, with the frailty term at the general practitioner practice level, accounting for clustering. A rare events bias adjustment is applied if few participants had recurrent events and truncation of small event risk sets is explored, to improve model accuracy. Global and event-specific estimates are presented, alongside a mean cumulative function plot to aid interpretation. The conditional frailty model global results are similar to PLEASANT results, but with greater precision (include time, recurrent events, within-participant dependence, and rare events adjustment). Event-specific results suggest an increasing risk reduction in medical appointments for the intervention group, in September-December 2013, as medical contacts increase over time. The conditional frailty model is recommended when recurrent events are a study outcome for clinical trials, including cluster randomised trials, to help explain changes in event risk over time, assisting clinical interpretation.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAsthmaChildCluster AnalysisHumansModels, StatisticalRecurrenceSurvival AnalysisCluster randomisedconditional frailtyrecurrent events

Identifiers

PMID40368384
PMCPMC12209553

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.