ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Preference-Informed Cluster Randomized Design for Pragmatic Clinical Trials.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preference-Informed Cluster Randomized Design for Pragmatic Clinical Trials.Statistics in medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cluster randomized trials (CRTs), in which entire clusters of subjects are randomized to treatment arms, are widely used in pragmatic trials to evaluate interventions under real-world conditions. However, CRTs are particularly vulnerable to treatment non-adherence, especially when cluster-level preferences lead subjects in clusters to deviate from their assigned treatment. Such deviations can reduce power, introduce bias, and compromise generalizability if not properly addressed. This research is directly motivated by a planned multi-center trial in Kawasaki Disease patients with high risk for coronary artery abnormalities, in which institutional treatment preferences influence both willingness to participate and adhere. To address this issue, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical model under a Preference-Informed Cluster Randomized Design (PICRD). This model explicitly incorporates cluster-level treatment switching into the analysis rather than excluding non-willing or non-adherent clusters. We conduct a simulation study to evaluate the performance of the PICRD model across a range of treatment effect sizes and switching proportions. Results demonstrate that the PICRD model consistently outperforms per-protocol analyses by maintaining higher power for the main treatment effect, producing narrower 95% credible intervals, and yielding more stable bias and root mean square error in the presence of substantial non-adherence. By explicitly modeling preference within a Bayesian hierarchical framework, the PICRD approach provides a flexible and robust solution for CRTs conducted in pragmatic settings when willingness to accept randomization assignment or adherence to randomization is often unrealistic.
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.