Cargando…

Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review

In a cluster-randomized trial (CRT), the number of participants enrolled often varies across clusters. This variation should be considered during both trial design and data analysis to ensure statistical performance goals are achieved. Most methodological literature on the CRT design has assumed equ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhan, Denghuang, Xu, Liang, Ouyang, Yongdong, Sawatzky, Richard, Wong, Hubert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8320970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34324593
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255389
_version_ 1783730739918929920
author Zhan, Denghuang
Xu, Liang
Ouyang, Yongdong
Sawatzky, Richard
Wong, Hubert
author_facet Zhan, Denghuang
Xu, Liang
Ouyang, Yongdong
Sawatzky, Richard
Wong, Hubert
author_sort Zhan, Denghuang
collection PubMed
description In a cluster-randomized trial (CRT), the number of participants enrolled often varies across clusters. This variation should be considered during both trial design and data analysis to ensure statistical performance goals are achieved. Most methodological literature on the CRT design has assumed equal cluster sizes. This scoping review focuses on methodology for unequal cluster size CRTs. EMBASE, Medline, Google Scholar, MathSciNet and Web of Science databases were searched to identify English-language articles reporting on methodology for unequal cluster size CRTs published until March 2021. We extracted data on the focus of the paper (power calculation, Type I error etc.), the type of CRT, the type and the range of parameter values investigated (number of clusters, mean cluster size, cluster size coefficient of variation, intra-cluster correlation coefficient, etc.), and the main conclusions. Seventy-nine of 5032 identified papers met the inclusion criteria. Papers primarily focused on the parallel-arm CRT (p-CRT, n = 60, 76%) and the stepped-wedge CRT (n = 14, 18%). Roughly 75% of the papers addressed trial design issues (sample size/power calculation) while 25% focused on analysis considerations (Type I error, bias, etc.). The ranges of parameter values explored varied substantially across different studies. Methods for accounting for unequal cluster sizes in the p-CRT have been investigated extensively for Gaussian and binary outcomes. Synthesizing the findings of these works is difficult as the magnitude of impact of the unequal cluster sizes varies substantially across the combinations and ranges of input parameters. Limited investigations have been done for other combinations of a CRT design by outcome type, particularly methodology involving binary outcomes—the most commonly used type of primary outcome in trials. The paucity of methodological papers outside of the p-CRT with Gaussian or binary outcomes highlights the need for further methodological development to fill the gaps.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8320970
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83209702021-07-31 Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review Zhan, Denghuang Xu, Liang Ouyang, Yongdong Sawatzky, Richard Wong, Hubert PLoS One Research Article In a cluster-randomized trial (CRT), the number of participants enrolled often varies across clusters. This variation should be considered during both trial design and data analysis to ensure statistical performance goals are achieved. Most methodological literature on the CRT design has assumed equal cluster sizes. This scoping review focuses on methodology for unequal cluster size CRTs. EMBASE, Medline, Google Scholar, MathSciNet and Web of Science databases were searched to identify English-language articles reporting on methodology for unequal cluster size CRTs published until March 2021. We extracted data on the focus of the paper (power calculation, Type I error etc.), the type of CRT, the type and the range of parameter values investigated (number of clusters, mean cluster size, cluster size coefficient of variation, intra-cluster correlation coefficient, etc.), and the main conclusions. Seventy-nine of 5032 identified papers met the inclusion criteria. Papers primarily focused on the parallel-arm CRT (p-CRT, n = 60, 76%) and the stepped-wedge CRT (n = 14, 18%). Roughly 75% of the papers addressed trial design issues (sample size/power calculation) while 25% focused on analysis considerations (Type I error, bias, etc.). The ranges of parameter values explored varied substantially across different studies. Methods for accounting for unequal cluster sizes in the p-CRT have been investigated extensively for Gaussian and binary outcomes. Synthesizing the findings of these works is difficult as the magnitude of impact of the unequal cluster sizes varies substantially across the combinations and ranges of input parameters. Limited investigations have been done for other combinations of a CRT design by outcome type, particularly methodology involving binary outcomes—the most commonly used type of primary outcome in trials. The paucity of methodological papers outside of the p-CRT with Gaussian or binary outcomes highlights the need for further methodological development to fill the gaps. Public Library of Science 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8320970/ /pubmed/34324593 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255389 Text en © 2021 Zhan et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhan, Denghuang
Xu, Liang
Ouyang, Yongdong
Sawatzky, Richard
Wong, Hubert
Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title_full Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title_fullStr Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title_short Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review
title_sort methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: a scoping review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8320970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34324593
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255389
work_keys_str_mv AT zhandenghuang methodsfordealingwithunequalclustersizesinclusterrandomizedtrialsascopingreview
AT xuliang methodsfordealingwithunequalclustersizesinclusterrandomizedtrialsascopingreview
AT ouyangyongdong methodsfordealingwithunequalclustersizesinclusterrandomizedtrialsascopingreview
AT sawatzkyrichard methodsfordealingwithunequalclustersizesinclusterrandomizedtrialsascopingreview
AT wonghubert methodsfordealingwithunequalclustersizesinclusterrandomizedtrialsascopingreview