145
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trials: a generic framework including parallel and multiple-level designs

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials (SW-CRTs) are being used with increasing frequency in health service evaluation. Conventionally, these studies are cross-sectional in design with equally spaced steps, with an equal number of clusters randomised at each step and data collected at each and every step. Here we introduce several variations on this design and consider implications for power.

          One modification we consider is the incomplete cross-sectional SW-CRT, where the number of clusters varies at each step or where at some steps, for example, implementation or transition periods, data are not collected. We show that the parallel CRT with staggered but balanced randomisation can be considered a special case of the incomplete SW-CRT. As too can the parallel CRT with baseline measures. And we extend these designs to allow for multiple layers of clustering, for example, wards within a hospital. Building on results for complete designs, power and detectable difference are derived using a Wald test and obtaining the variance–covariance matrix of the treatment effect assuming a generalised linear mixed model. These variations are illustrated by several real examples.

          We recommend that whilst the impact of transition periods on power is likely to be small, where they are a feature of the design they should be incorporated. We also show examples in which the power of a SW-CRT increases as the intra-cluster correlation (ICC) increases and demonstrate that the impact of the ICC is likely to be smaller in a SW-CRT compared with a parallel CRT, especially where there are multiple levels of clustering. Finally, through this unified framework, the efficiency of the SW-CRT and the parallel CRT can be compared.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation.

          To describe the application of the stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design. Systematic review. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, and Current Controlled Trials Register for articles published up to January 2010. Stepped wedge CRCTs from all fields of research were included. Two authors independently reviewed and extracted data from the studies. Twenty-five studies were included in the review. Motivations for using the design included ethical, logistical, financial, social, and political acceptability and methodological reasons. Most studies were evaluating an intervention during routine implementation. For most of the included studies, there was also a belief or empirical evidence suggesting that the intervention would do more good than harm. There was variation in data analysis methods and insufficient quality of reporting. The stepped wedge CRCT design has been mainly used for evaluating interventions during routine implementation, particularly for interventions that have been shown to be effective in more controlled research settings, or where there is lack of evidence of effectiveness but there is a strong belief that they will do more good than harm. There is need for consistent data analysis and reporting. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Stepped wedge designs could reduce the required sample size in cluster randomized trials.

            The stepped wedge design is increasingly being used in cluster randomized trials (CRTs). However, there is not much information available about the design and analysis strategies for these kinds of trials. Approaches to sample size and power calculations have been provided, but a simple sample size formula is lacking. Therefore, our aim is to provide a sample size formula for cluster randomized stepped wedge designs. We derived a design effect (sample size correction factor) that can be used to estimate the required sample size for stepped wedge designs. Furthermore, we compared the required sample size for the stepped wedge design with a parallel group and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) design. Our formula corrects for clustering as well as for the design. Apart from the cluster size and intracluster correlation, the design effect depends on choices of the number of steps, the number of baseline measurements, and the number of measurements between steps. The stepped wedge design requires a substantial smaller sample size than a parallel group and ANCOVA design. For CRTs, the stepped wedge design is far more efficient than the parallel group and ANCOVA design in terms of sample size. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters

              Abstract Background Cluster randomised controlled trials (CRCTs) are frequently used in health service evaluation. Assuming an average cluster size, required sample sizes are readily computed for both binary and continuous outcomes, by estimating a design effect or inflation factor. However, where the number of clusters are fixed in advance, but where it is possible to increase the number of individuals within each cluster, as is frequently the case in health service evaluation, sample size formulae have been less well studied. Methods We systematically outline sample size formulae (including required number of randomisation units, detectable difference and power) for CRCTs with a fixed number of clusters, to provide a concise summary for both binary and continuous outcomes. Extensions to the case of unequal cluster sizes are provided. Results For trials with a fixed number of equal sized clusters (k), the trial will be feasible provided the number of clusters is greater than the product of the number of individuals required under individual randomisation (nI ) and the estimated intra-cluster correlation (ρ). So, a simple rule is that the number of clusters (k) will be sufficient provided: Where this is not the case, investigators can determine the maximum available power to detect the pre-specified difference, or the minimum detectable difference under the pre-specified value for power. Conclusions Designing a CRCT with a fixed number of clusters might mean that the study will not be feasible, leading to the notion of a minimum detectable difference (or a maximum achievable power), irrespective of how many individuals are included within each cluster.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Stat Med
                Stat Med
                sim
                Statistics in Medicine
                John Wiley & Sons Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                0277-6715
                1097-0258
                30 January 2015
                24 October 2014
                : 34
                : 2
                : 181-196
                Affiliations
                Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham U.K.
                Author notes
                Corresponding to: Karla Hemming, Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, U.K.
                Article
                10.1002/sim.6325
                4286109
                25346484
                a52d7788-adc4-4625-bf4a-cb20f5aa6b16
                © 2014 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 02 August 2013
                : 20 September 2014
                Categories
                Research Articles

                Biostatistics
                stepped-wedge,cluster,sample size,multiple levels of clustering
                Biostatistics
                stepped-wedge, cluster, sample size, multiple levels of clustering

                Comments

                Comment on this article