Lack of concealment may lead to selection bias in cluster randomized trials of palliative care
- 1 January 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Palliative Medicine
- Vol. 16 (1) , 43-49
- https://doi.org/10.1191/0269216302pm523oa
Abstract
Comprehensive palliative care programs are often implemented on a community level, and to evaluate such interventions, randomization by cluster (community) may be the only feasible method. In trials randomizing individual subjects, the importance of proper concealment has been stressed. In cluster randomized trials, however, concealment of individual patient allocation is often impossible. The following risk of selection bias has been given little attention. In the present study, comparing palliative care to conventional care, community health care districts were defined as clusters and randomized. The patients' treatment assignment was determined by the allocation of the cluster in which they resided, and hence predictable by their address. A biased selection based on practical considerations related to patients' diagnoses and hospital departments was suspected. To explore this, cancer diagnoses were grouped according to local tradition for sharing of treatment responsibility among hospital departments. A significant difference between trial arms in distribution of these groups was revealed and strongly supported our suspicion. The finding carries an important message to future researchers: when using cluster randomization, any evidence of selection bias should be carefully checked and reported.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Methods in health service research: Evaluation of health interventions at area and organisation levelBMJ, 1999
- Place of death and access to home care services: are certain patient groups at a disadvantage?Social Science & Medicine, 1998
- Subverting Randomization in Controlled TrialsJAMA, 1995
- Accounting for cluster randomization: a review of primary prevention trials, 1990 through 1993.American Journal of Public Health, 1995
- Empirical Evidence of BiasJAMA, 1995
- Methods for Comparing Event Rates in Intervention Studies When the Unit of Allocation is a ClusterAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1994
- Psychological distress in cancer patients with advanced diseaseRadiotherapy and Oncology, 1993
- An Introduction to the BootstrapPublished by Springer Nature ,1993
- Randomised controlled trial of effects of coordinating care for terminally ill cancer patients.BMJ, 1992
- A Methodological Review of Non-Therapeutic Intervention Trials Employing Cluster Randomization, 1979–1989International Journal of Epidemiology, 1990