Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41481239›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of epidemiology2026

Reported problems and responses during the conduct of stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials in healthcare settings: a qualitative systematic review.

Kathryn S Taylor, Julie McLellan, Caroline Kristunas, Clare Bankhead, Nicola Pidduck, Nia W Roberts, Rafael Perera, Karla Hemming

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Kathryn S TaylorNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6589-5456
Julie McLellanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Caroline KristunasInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Clare BankheadNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Nicola PidduckNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Nia W RobertsBodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Rafael PereraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Karla HemmingDepartment of Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2226-6550

Funding

Applied Research Centre (ARC) West Midlands and MRC-NIHR Develop Guidance for Better Research Methods MR/W020688/1National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)NIHR NIHR204406NIHR Senior Research Fellowship SRF-2017-10-002Wellcome Trust 200172
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial (SW-CRT) is a pragmatic complex design that can be difficult to implement. We aimed to summarize the reported problems and responses to problems in studies recently published after the publication of the reporting guidelines for SW-CRTs.

methodsWe searched the literature for SW-CRTs published between 9 November 2018 and 23 February 2021 to identify reported SW-CRT-related problems (defined as relating to the components of the design, i.e. involving clusters and the staggered intervention implementation) and responses to problems. We carried out a thematic analysis to derive descriptive themes and overarching analytical themes.

resultsAmong 84 included SW-CRTs, 62 (74%) reported 107 problems related to the SW-CRT design and 38 responses to 36 problems were reported by 24 trials. The "problems" formed six descriptive problem themes: "participant recruitment," "cluster issues" (e.g. cluster merger or dropout), "internal factors" (e.g. logistic or administrative issues), "external factors" (e.g. weather or religious events), "outcome measurement" (e.g. practicalities around measurement of repeated outcomes), and "intervention implementation" (e.g. delays or contamination). The "responses" formed six descriptive themes: "adding new clusters," "modifying the randomization," "reducing contamination," "changing outcomes," "intention-to-treat," and "modifying the analysis."

conclusionSW-CRTs commonly run into problems. Two overarching and conflicting analytical problem themes emerged: the "struggle to adhere to the protocol," given the defining features of the SW-CRT design, when faced against "real-life pressures" created by internal and external factors. Further research is needed to explore whether responses to these problems have resource or integrity ramifications.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignCluster AnalysisHumansPatient SelectionQualitative Researchimplementationmethodologyprotocol adherencequalitative reviewreal-world problemsrecruitmentstepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

Identifiers

PMID41481239
PMCPMC12758014

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.