Cargando…

Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of risks of bias in cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Review undertaken in duplicate of a random sample of 40 primary reports of cluster-randomized trials of indiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Easter, Christina, Thompson, Jennifer A., Eldridge, Sandra, Taljaard, Monica, Hemming, Karla
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8592576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34197941
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.06.021
_version_ 1784599490819260416
author Easter, Christina
Thompson, Jennifer A.
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Hemming, Karla
author_facet Easter, Christina
Thompson, Jennifer A.
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Hemming, Karla
author_sort Easter, Christina
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of risks of bias in cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Review undertaken in duplicate of a random sample of 40 primary reports of cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions. RESULTS: The most common reported reasons for adopting cluster randomization were the need to avoid contamination (17, 42.5%) and practical considerations (14, 35%). Of the 40 trials all but one was assessed as being at risk of bias. A majority (27, 67.5%) were assessed as at risk due to the timing of identification and recruitment of participants; many (21, 52.5%) due to an apparent lack of adequate allocation concealment; and many due to selectively reported results (22, 55%), arising from a mixture of reasons including lack of documentation of primary outcome. Other risks mostly occurred infrequently. CONCLUSION: Many cluster-randomized trials evaluating individual-level interventions appear to be at risk of bias, mostly due to identification and recruitment biases. We recommend that investigators carefully consider the need for cluster randomization; follow recommended procedures to mitigate risks of identification and recruitment bias; and adhere to good reporting practices including clear documentation of primary outcome and allocation concealment methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8592576
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85925762021-11-22 Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias Easter, Christina Thompson, Jennifer A. Eldridge, Sandra Taljaard, Monica Hemming, Karla J Clin Epidemiol Review OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of risks of bias in cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Review undertaken in duplicate of a random sample of 40 primary reports of cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions. RESULTS: The most common reported reasons for adopting cluster randomization were the need to avoid contamination (17, 42.5%) and practical considerations (14, 35%). Of the 40 trials all but one was assessed as being at risk of bias. A majority (27, 67.5%) were assessed as at risk due to the timing of identification and recruitment of participants; many (21, 52.5%) due to an apparent lack of adequate allocation concealment; and many due to selectively reported results (22, 55%), arising from a mixture of reasons including lack of documentation of primary outcome. Other risks mostly occurred infrequently. CONCLUSION: Many cluster-randomized trials evaluating individual-level interventions appear to be at risk of bias, mostly due to identification and recruitment biases. We recommend that investigators carefully consider the need for cluster randomization; follow recommended procedures to mitigate risks of identification and recruitment bias; and adhere to good reporting practices including clear documentation of primary outcome and allocation concealment methods. Elsevier 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8592576/ /pubmed/34197941 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.06.021 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. https://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 Review
Easter, Christina
Thompson, Jennifer A.
Eldridge, Sandra
Taljaard, Monica
Hemming, Karla
Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title_full Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title_fullStr Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title_full_unstemmed Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title_short Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
title_sort cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8592576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34197941
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.06.021
work_keys_str_mv AT easterchristina clusterrandomizedtrialsofindividuallevelinterventionswereathighriskofbias
AT thompsonjennifera clusterrandomizedtrialsofindividuallevelinterventionswereathighriskofbias
AT eldridgesandra clusterrandomizedtrialsofindividuallevelinterventionswereathighriskofbias
AT taljaardmonica clusterrandomizedtrialsofindividuallevelinterventionswereathighriskofbias
AT hemmingkarla clusterrandomizedtrialsofindividuallevelinterventionswereathighriskofbias