Varying cluster sizes in trials with clusters in one treatment arm: sample size adjustments when testing treatment effects with linear mixed models
- PMID: 19472169
- DOI: 10.1002/sim.3620
Varying cluster sizes in trials with clusters in one treatment arm: sample size adjustments when testing treatment effects with linear mixed models
Abstract
Trials in which treatments induce clustering of observations in one of two treatment arms, such as when comparing group therapy with pharmacological treatment or with a waiting-list group, are examined with respect to the efficiency loss caused by varying cluster sizes. When observations are (approximately) normally distributed, treatment effects can be estimated and tested through linear mixed model analysis. For maximum likelihood estimation, the asymptotic relative efficiency of unequal versus equal cluster sizes is derived. In an extensive Monte Carlo simulation for small sample sizes, the asymptotic relative efficiency turns out to be accurate for the treatment effect, but less accurate for the random intercept variance. For the treatment effect, the efficiency loss due to varying cluster sizes rarely exceeds 10 per cent, which can be regained by recruiting 11 per cent more clusters for one arm and 11 per cent more persons for the other. For the intercept variance the loss can be 16 per cent, which requires recruiting 19 per cent more clusters for one arm, with no additional recruitment of subjects for the other arm.
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Sample size adjustments for varying cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes analyzed with second-order PQL mixed logistic regression.Stat Med. 2010 Jun 30;29(14):1488-501. doi: 10.1002/sim.3857. Stat Med. 2010. PMID: 20101669
-
Relative efficiency of unequal versus equal cluster sizes in cluster randomized and multicentre trials.Stat Med. 2007 Jun 15;26(13):2589-603. doi: 10.1002/sim.2740. Stat Med. 2007. PMID: 17094074
-
Relative efficiency of unequal cluster sizes for variance component estimation in cluster randomized and multicentre trials.Stat Methods Med Res. 2008 Aug;17(4):439-58. doi: 10.1177/0962280206079018. Epub 2007 Aug 14. Stat Methods Med Res. 2008. PMID: 17698940
-
Imputation strategies for missing continuous outcomes in cluster randomized trials.Biom J. 2008 Jun;50(3):329-45. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200710423. Biom J. 2008. PMID: 18537126 Review.
-
When can group level clustering be ignored? Multilevel models versus single-level models with sparse data.J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008 Aug;62(8):752-8. doi: 10.1136/jech.2007.060798. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008. PMID: 18621963 Review.
Cited by
-
Designing individually randomized group treatment trials with repeated outcome measurements using generalized estimating equations.Stat Med. 2024 Jan 30;43(2):358-378. doi: 10.1002/sim.9966. Epub 2023 Nov 27. Stat Med. 2024. PMID: 38009329 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-efficient designs for three-arm trials with treatment delivered by health professionals: Sample sizes for a combination of nested and crossed designs.Clin Trials. 2018 Apr;15(2):169-177. doi: 10.1177/1740774517750622. Epub 2018 Jan 10. Clin Trials. 2018. PMID: 29316807 Free PMC article.
-
Multilevel factorial designs with experiment-induced clustering.Psychol Methods. 2018 Sep;23(3):458-479. doi: 10.1037/met0000128. Epub 2017 Apr 6. Psychol Methods. 2018. PMID: 28383950 Free PMC article.
-
Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: A scoping review.PLoS One. 2021 Jul 29;16(7):e0255389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255389. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34324593 Free PMC article.
-
Review of Recent Methodological Developments in Group-Randomized Trials: Part 1-Design.Am J Public Health. 2017 Jun;107(6):907-915. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.303706. Epub 2017 Apr 20. Am J Public Health. 2017. PMID: 28426295 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Medical