SynthesisNature communications2025
Characterisation of between-cluster heterogeneity in malaria cluster randomised trials to inform future sample size calculations.
Synthesis in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prevalence of malaria and its major parasite species in Bangladesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Malaria journal · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of entomological outcomes and sampling approaches used in the evaluation of cluster randomised controlled trials for malaria vector control products.Malaria journal · 2026Pooled it
- A sustainable house design to improve child health in rural Africa: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- Combining statistical and dynamical modelling to guide the design of cluster randomised trials for malaria.BMJ global health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cluster randomised trials (CRTs) are important tools for evaluating the community-wide effect of malaria interventions. During the design stage, CRT sample sizes need to be inflated to account for the cluster heterogeneity in measured outcomes. The coefficient of variation (k), a measure of such heterogeneity, is typically used in malaria CRTs yet is often predicted without prior data. Underestimation of k decreases study power, thus increases the probability of generating null results. In this meta-analysis of cluster-summary data from 24 malaria CRTs, we calculate true prevalence and incidence k values using methods-of-moments and regression modelling approaches. Using random effects regression modelling, we investigate the impact of empirical k values on original trial power and explore factors associated with elevated k. Results show empirical estimates of k often exceed those used in sample size calculations, which reduces study power and effect size precision. Elevated k values are associated with incidence outcomes (compared to prevalence), lower endemicity settings, and uneven intervention coverage across clusters. Study findings can enhance the robustness of future malaria CRT sample size calculations by providing informed k estimates based on expected prevalence or incidence, in the absence of cluster-level data.
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.