Design and analysis of clinical trials with clustering effects due to treatment
- 1 April 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Clinical Trials
- Vol. 2 (2) , 152-162
- https://doi.org/10.1191/1740774505cn076oa
Abstract
Where patients receive therapy as a group, there are good theoretical reasons to believe that variation in the outcome will be smaller for patients treated in the same group than for patients treated in different groups. Similarly, where different therapists treat different groups of patients, outcome for patients treated by the same therapist may differ less than outcome for patients treated by different therapists. Clinical trials evaluating such therapies need to consider this potential lack of independence. As with cluster-randomized trials, this has implications for the precision of treatment effects estimates and statistical power. There are nevertheless differences between clustering due to the organization of treatment and that due to randomization. In cluster-randomized trials the distribution of cluster sizes in each treatment arm should be similar as a consequence of randomization unless there is differential loss to follow-up. With clustering due to therapy group or therapist, cluster size may differ systematically between treatment arms, due to size of therapy groups or differing health professional caseload. Intra-cluster correlation may also differ between treatment arms. The implications of differential cluster size and intracluster correlation for design and analysis will be illustrated by data from two trials, the first comparing nurse practitioner care with general practitioner care, and the second comparing a group therapy with individual treatment as usual. The special case where a group therapy or therapist is compared with an unclustered treatment is examined in detail using a simulation study. The implications of differential clustering effects for sample size and power are addressed. It is argued that the design and analysis of this type of trial should take account of possible heterogeneity in cluster size and intracluster correlation.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Should Providers of Treatment Be Regarded as a Random Factor? If It Ain't Broke, Don't "Fix" It: A Comment on Siemer and Joormann (2003).Psychological Methods, 2003
- The statistical analysis of data from small groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002
- Analyzing data from individuals in groups: The past, the present, and the future.Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2001
- Contamination in trials: is cluster randomisation the answer?BMJ, 2001
- The consequence of ignoring a nested factor on measures of effect size in analysis of variance.Psychological Methods, 2000
- Models of Non-Independence in Dyadic ResearchJournal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1996
- Meta‐Analysis of Therapist Effects in Psychotherapy Outcome StudiesPsychotherapy Research, 1991
- Implications of therapist effects for the design and analysis of comparative studies of psychotherapies.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1991
- Group dynamics and individual performances: Pseudogroup and quasi-F analyses.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1981
- The therapist-as-fixed-effect fallacy in psychotherapy research.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978