Changing cluster composition in cluster randomised controlled trials: Design and analysis considerations

4Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: There are many methodological challenges in the conduct and analysis of cluster randomised controlled trials, but one that has received little attention is that of post-randomisation changes to cluster composition. To illustrate this, we focus on the issue of cluster merging, considering the impact on the design, analysis and interpretation of trial outcomes.Methods: We explored the effects of merging clusters on study power using standard methods of power calculation. We assessed the potential impacts on study findings of both homogeneous cluster merges (involving clusters randomised to the same arm of a trial) and heterogeneous merges (involving clusters randomised to different arms of a trial) by simulation. To determine the impact on bias and precision of treatment effect estimates, we applied standard methods of analysis to different populations under analysis.Results: Cluster merging produced a systematic reduction in study power. This effect depended on the number of merges and was most pronounced when variability in cluster size was at its greatest. Simulations demonstrate that the impact on analysis was minimal when cluster merges were homogeneous, with impact on study power being balanced by a change in observed intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC). We found a decrease in study power when cluster merges were heterogeneous, and the estimate of treatment effect was attenuated.Conclusions: Examples of cluster merges found in previously published reports of cluster randomised trials were typically homogeneous rather than heterogeneous. Simulations demonstrated that trial findings in such cases would be unbiased. However, simulations also showed that any heterogeneous cluster merges would introduce bias that would be hard to quantify, as well as having negative impacts on the precision of estimates obtained. Further methodological development is warranted to better determine how to analyse such trials appropriately. Interim recommendations include avoidance of cluster merges where possible, discontinuation of clusters following heterogeneous merges, allowance for potential loss of clusters and additional variability in cluster size in the original sample size calculation, and use of appropriate ICC estimates that reflect cluster size. © 2014 Corrigan et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

References Powered by Scopus

CONSORT statement: Extension to cluster randomised trials

1215Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Components of variance and intraclass correlations for the design of community-based surveys and intervention studies: Data from the Health Survey for England 1994

604Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Randomization by cluster: Sample size requirements and analysis

570Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Pragmatic study designs for older adults with cancer: Report from the U13 conference

38Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Challenges in Implementing Hospice Clinical Trials: Preserving Scientific Integrity While Facing Change

17Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An imbalance in cluster sizes does not lead to notable loss of power in cross-sectional, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials with a continuous outcome

17Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Corrigan, N., Bankart, M. J. G., Gray, L. J., & Smith, K. L. (2014). Changing cluster composition in cluster randomised controlled trials: Design and analysis considerations. Trials, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-184

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 6

50%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 3

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

17%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

8%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 3

38%

Mathematics 3

38%

Design 1

13%

Social Sciences 1

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free