Cargando…

A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice

OBJECTIVES: Reviews of the handling of covariates in trials have explicitly excluded cluster randomized trials (CRTs). In this study, we review the use of covariates in randomization, the reporting of covariates, and adjusted analyses in CRTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We reviewed a random sample of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wright, Neil, Ivers, Noah, Eldridge, Sandra, Taljaard, Monica, Bremner, Stephen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4425474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25648791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.006
_version_ 1782370486521430016
author Wright, Neil
Ivers, Noah
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Bremner, Stephen
author_facet Wright, Neil
Ivers, Noah
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Bremner, Stephen
author_sort Wright, Neil
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Reviews of the handling of covariates in trials have explicitly excluded cluster randomized trials (CRTs). In this study, we review the use of covariates in randomization, the reporting of covariates, and adjusted analyses in CRTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We reviewed a random sample of 300 CRTs published between 2000 and 2008 across 150 English language journals. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of trials used covariates in randomization. Only 69 (23%) included tables of cluster- and individual-level covariates. Fifty-eight percent reported significance tests of baseline balance. Of 207 trials that reported baseline measures of the primary outcome, 155 (75%) subsequently adjusted for these in analyses. Of 174 trials that used covariates in randomization, 30 (17%) included an analysis adjusting for all those covariates. Of 219 trial reports that included an adjusted analysis of the primary outcome, only 71 (32%) reported that covariates were chosen a priori. CONCLUSION: There are some marked discrepancies between practice and guidance on the use of covariates in the design, analysis, and reporting of CRTs. It is essential that researchers follow guidelines on the use and reporting of covariates in CRTs, promoting the validity of trial conclusions and quality of trial reports.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4425474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44254742015-06-01 A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice Wright, Neil Ivers, Noah Eldridge, Sandra Taljaard, Monica Bremner, Stephen J Clin Epidemiol Original Article OBJECTIVES: Reviews of the handling of covariates in trials have explicitly excluded cluster randomized trials (CRTs). In this study, we review the use of covariates in randomization, the reporting of covariates, and adjusted analyses in CRTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We reviewed a random sample of 300 CRTs published between 2000 and 2008 across 150 English language journals. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of trials used covariates in randomization. Only 69 (23%) included tables of cluster- and individual-level covariates. Fifty-eight percent reported significance tests of baseline balance. Of 207 trials that reported baseline measures of the primary outcome, 155 (75%) subsequently adjusted for these in analyses. Of 174 trials that used covariates in randomization, 30 (17%) included an analysis adjusting for all those covariates. Of 219 trial reports that included an adjusted analysis of the primary outcome, only 71 (32%) reported that covariates were chosen a priori. CONCLUSION: There are some marked discrepancies between practice and guidance on the use of covariates in the design, analysis, and reporting of CRTs. It is essential that researchers follow guidelines on the use and reporting of covariates in CRTs, promoting the validity of trial conclusions and quality of trial reports. Elsevier 2015-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4425474/ /pubmed/25648791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.006 Text en © 2015 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Wright, Neil
Ivers, Noah
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Bremner, Stephen
A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title_full A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title_fullStr A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title_full_unstemmed A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title_short A review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
title_sort review of the use of covariates in cluster randomized trials uncovers marked discrepancies between guidance and practice
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4425474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25648791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.006
work_keys_str_mv AT wrightneil areviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT iversnoah areviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT eldridgesandra areviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT taljaardmonica areviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT bremnerstephen areviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT wrightneil reviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT iversnoah reviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT eldridgesandra reviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT taljaardmonica reviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice
AT bremnerstephen reviewoftheuseofcovariatesinclusterrandomizedtrialsuncoversmarkeddiscrepanciesbetweenguidanceandpractice