Search

Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials (SW-CRTs) are traditionally analyzed with models that assume an immediate and sustained treatment effect. Previous work has shown that making such an assumption in the analysis of SW-CRTs when the true underlying treatment effect varies by exposure time can produce severely misleading estimates. Alternatively, the true underlying treatment effect might vary by calendar time. Comparatively less work has examined treatment effect structure misspecification in this setting. Here, we evaluate the behavior of the mixed effects model-based immediate treatment effect, exposure time-averaged treatment effect, and calendar time-averaged treatment effect estimators in different scenarios where they are misspecified for the true underlying treatment effect structure. We prove that the immediate treatment effect estimator can be relatively robust to bias when estimating a true underlying calendar time-averaged treatment effect estimand. However, when there is a true underlying calendar (exposure) time-varying treatment effect, misspecifying an analysis with an exposure (calendar) time-averaged treatment effect estimator can yield severely misleading estimates and even converge to a value of the opposite sign of the true calendar (exposure) time-averaged treatment effect estimand. Researchers should carefully consider how the treatment effect may vary as a function of exposure time and/or calendar time in the analysis of SW-CRTs., Comment: 49 pages (29 main, 20 appendix), 18 figures (10 main, 8 appendix)

Multi-period cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are increasingly used for the evaluation of interventions delivered at the group level. While generalized estimating equations (GEE) are commonly used to provide population-averaged inference in CRTs, there is a gap of general methods and statistical software tools for power calculation based on multi-parameter, within-cluster correlation structures suitable for multi-period CRTs that can accommodate both complete and incomplete designs. A computationally fast, non-simulation procedure for determining statistical power is described for the GEE analysis of complete and incomplete multi-period cluster randomized trials. The procedure is implemented via a SAS macro, \%CRTFASTGEEPWR, which is applicable to binary, count and continuous responses and several correlation structures in multi-period CRTs. The SAS macro is illustrated in the power calculation of two complete and two incomplete stepped wedge cluster randomized trial scenarios under different specifications of marginal mean model and within-cluster correlation structure. The proposed GEE power method is quite general as demonstrated in the SAS macro with numerous input options. The power procedure and macro can also be used in the planning of parallel and crossover CRTs in addition to cross-sectional and closed cohort stepped wedge trials.

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) frequently recruit a small number of clusters, therefore necessitating the application of small-sample corrections for valid inference. A recent systematic review indicated that CRTs reporting right-censored, time-to-event outcomes are not uncommon, and that the marginal Cox proportional hazards model is one of the common approaches used for primary analysis. While small-sample corrections have been studied under marginal models with continuous, binary and count outcomes, no prior research has been devoted to the development and evaluation of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators when clustered time-to-event outcomes are analyzed by the marginal Cox model. To improve current practice, we propose 9 bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators for the analysis of CRTs using the marginal Cox model, and report on a simulation study to evaluate their small-sample properties. Our results indicate that the optimal choice of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator for CRTs with survival outcomes can depend on the variability of cluster sizes, and can also slightly differ whether it is evaluated according to relative bias or type I error rate. Finally, we illustrate the new variance estimators in a real-world CRT where the conclusion about intervention effectiveness differs depending on the use of small-sample bias corrections. The proposed sandwich variance estimators are implemented in an R package CoxBcv.

In this article, we develop methods for sample size and power calculations in four-level intervention studies when intervention assignment is carried out at any level, with a particular focus on cluster randomized trials (CRTs). CRTs involving four levels are becoming popular in health care research, where the effects are measured, for example, from evaluations (level 1) within participants (level 2) in divisions (level 3) that are nested in clusters (level 4). In such multi-level CRTs, we consider three types of intraclass correlations between different evaluations to account for such clustering: that of the same participant, that of different participants from the same division, and that of different participants from different divisions in the same cluster. Assuming arbitrary link and variance functions, with the proposed correlation structure as the true correlation structure, closed-form sample size formulas for randomization carried out at any level (including individually randomized trials within a four-level clustered structure) are derived based on the generalized estimating equations approach using the model-based variance and using the sandwich variance with an independence working correlation matrix. We demonstrate that empirical power corresponds well with that predicted by the proposed method for as few as 8 clusters, when data are analyzed using the matrix-adjusted estimating equations for the correlation parameters with a bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator, under both balanced and unbalanced designs.

A practical limitation of cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) is that the number of available clusters may be small, resulting in an increased risk of baseline imbalance under simple randomization. Constrained randomization overcomes this issue by restricting the allocation to a subset of randomization schemes where sufficient overall covariate balance across comparison arms is achieved. However, for multi-arm cRCTs, several design and analysis issues pertaining to constrained randomization have not been fully investigated. Motivated by an ongoing multi-arm cRCT, we elaborate the method of constrained randomization and provide a comprehensive evaluation of the statistical properties of model-based and randomization-based tests under both simple and constrained randomization designs in multi-arm cRCTs, with varying combinations of design and analysis-based covariate adjustment strategies. In particular, as randomization-based tests have not been extensively studied in multi-arm cRCTs, we additionally develop most-powerful randomization tests under the linear mixed model framework for our comparisons. Our results indicate that under constrained randomization, both model-based and randomization-based analyses could gain power while preserving nominal type I error rate, given proper analysis-based adjustment for the baseline covariates. Randomization-based analyses, however, are more robust against violations of distributional assumptions. The choice of balance metrics and candidate set sizes and their implications on the testing of the pairwise and global hypotheses are also discussed. Finally, we caution against the design and analysis of multi-arm cRCTs with an extremely small number of clusters, due to insufficient degrees of freedom and the tendency to obtain an overly restricted randomization space., Comment: 49 pages; updated Statistic (6) in Section 3.2; updated results in Section 5

Stepped wedge cluster randomized trials (SW-CRTs) with binary outcomes are increasingly used in prevention and implementation studies. Marginal models represent a flexible tool for analyzing SW-CRTs with population-averaged interpretations, but the joint estimation of the mean and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) can be computationally intensive due to large cluster-period sizes. Motivated by the need for marginal inference in SW-CRTs, we propose a simple and efficient estimating equations approach to analyze cluster-period means. We show that the quasi-score for the marginal mean defined from individual-level observations can be reformulated as the quasi-score for the same marginal mean defined from the cluster-period means. An additional mapping of the individual-level ICCs into correlations for the cluster-period means further provides a rigorous justification for the cluster-period approach. The proposed approach addresses a long-recognized computational burden associated with estimating equations defined based on individual-level observations, and enables fast point and interval estimation of the intervention effect and correlations. We further propose matrix-adjusted estimating equations to improve the finite-sample inference for ICCs. By providing a valid approach to estimate ICCs within the class of generalized linear models for correlated binary outcomes, this article operationalizes key recommendations from the CONSORT extension to SW-CRTs, including the reporting of ICCs., Comment: 28 pages, 2 figures, 3 tables

In low-resource settings where vital registration of death is not routine it is often of critical interest to determine and study the cause of death (COD) for individuals and the cause-specific mortality fraction (CSMF) for populations. Post-mortem autopsies, considered the gold standard for COD assignment, are often difficult or impossible to implement due to deaths occurring outside the hospital, expense, and/or cultural norms. For this reason, Verbal Autopsies (VAs) are commonly conducted, consisting of a questionnaire administered to next of kin recording demographic information, known medical conditions, symptoms, and other factors for the decedent. This article proposes a novel class of hierarchical factor regression models that avoid restrictive assumptions of standard methods, allow both the mean and covariance to vary with COD category, and can include covariate information on the decedent, region, or events surrounding death. Taking a Bayesian approach to inference, this work develops an MCMC algorithm and validates the FActor Regression for Verbal Autopsy (FARVA) model in simulation experiments. An application of FARVA to real VA data shows improved goodness-of-fit and better predictive performance in inferring COD and CSMF over competing methods. Code and a user manual are made available at https://github.com/kelrenmor/farva.