Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 Aug 1:13:120.
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-120.

Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review

Affiliations
Review

Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review

Noah M Ivers et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Reviews have repeatedly noted important methodological issues in the conduct and reporting of cluster randomized controlled trials (C-RCTs). These reviews usually focus on whether the intracluster correlation was explicitly considered in the design and analysis of the C-RCT. However, another important aspect requiring special attention in C-RCTs is the risk for imbalance of covariates at baseline. Imbalance of important covariates at baseline decreases statistical power and precision of the results. Imbalance also reduces face validity and credibility of the trial results. The risk of imbalance is elevated in C-RCTs compared to trials randomizing individuals because of the difficulties in recruiting clusters and the nested nature of correlated patient-level data. A variety of restricted randomization methods have been proposed as way to minimize risk of imbalance. However, there is little guidance regarding how to best restrict randomization for any given C-RCT. The advantages and limitations of different allocation techniques, including stratification, matching, minimization, and covariate-constrained randomization are reviewed as they pertain to C-RCTs to provide investigators with guidance for choosing the best allocation technique for their trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Questions to ask and potential answers when trialists and statisticians work together to consider allocation techniques for balancing covariates in cluster-trials.aOne would expect that in most trials access to some relevant data would become accessible immediately after recruitment and prior to allocation. bOnly use matching if confident in ability to achieve a good match

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Donner A, Klar N. Design and Analysis of Cluster Randomization Trials in Health Research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2000.
    1. Murray DM, Pals SL, Blitstein JL, Alfano CM, Lehman J. Design and analysis of group-randomized trials in cancer: a review of current practices. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:483–491. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn066. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Varnell SP, Murray DM, Janega JB, Blitstein JL. Design and analysis of group-randomized trials: a review of recent practices. Am J Public Health. 2004;94:393–399. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.94.3.393. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ivers NM, Taljaard M, Dixon S, Bennett C, McRae A, Taleban J, Skea Z, Brehaut JC, Boruch RF, Eccles MP, Grimshaw JM, Weijer C, Zwarenstein M, Donner A. Impact of CONSORT extension for cluster randomised trials on quality of reporting and study methodology: review of random sample of 300 trials, 2000–8. BMJ. 2011;343:d5886. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5886. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eldridge SM, Ashby D, Feder GS, Rudnicka AR, Ukoumunne OC. Lessons for cluster randomized trials in the twenty-first century: a systematic review of trials in primary care. Clin Trials. 2004;1:80–90. doi: 10.1191/1740774504cn006rr. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types