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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |