Dataset Information

The hunt for efficient, incomplete designs for stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We consider the design of stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures. Suppose we recruit from a fixed number of clusters where eligible participants present continuously, and suppose we have fine control over when each cluster crosses to the intervention. Suppose also that we want to minimise the number of participants, leading us to consider "incomplete" designs (i.e. without full recruitment). How can we schedule recruitment and cross-over at different clusters to recruit efficiently while achieving good precision?

Methods

The large number of possible designs can make exhaustive searches impractical. Instead we consider an algorithm using iterative improvements to hunt for an efficient design. At each iteration (starting from a complete design) a single participant - the one with the smallest impact on precision - is removed, and small changes preserving total sample size are made until no further improvement in precision can be found.

Results

Striking patterns emerge. Solutions typically focus recruitment and cross-over on the leading diagonal of the cluster-by-time diagram, but in some scenarios clusters form distinct phases resembling before-and-after designs.

Conclusions

There is much to be learned about optimal design for incomplete stepped wedge trials. Algorithmic searches could offer a practical approach to trial design in complex settings generally.

SUBMITTER: Hooper R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7672921 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The hunt for efficient, incomplete designs for stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures.

Hooper Richard R Kasza Jessica J Forbes Andrew A

BMC medical research methodology 20201117 1

<h4>Background</h4>We consider the design of stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures. Suppose we recruit from a fixed number of clusters where eligible participants present continuously, and suppose we have fine control over when each cluster crosses to the intervention. Suppose also that we want to minimise the number of participants, leading us to consider "incomplete" designs (i.e. without full recruitment). How can we schedule recruitment and cross-ov ...[more]

PMID: 33203361

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/Aims We sought to optimise the design of stepped wedge trials with an equal allocation of clusters to sequences and explored sample size comparisons with alternative trial designs. Methods We developed a new expression for the design effect for a stepped wedge trial, assuming that observations are equally correlated within clusters and an equal number of observations in each period between sequences switching to the intervention. We minimised the design effect with respect to (1) the fraction of observations before the first and after the final sequence switches (the periods with all clusters in the control or intervention condition, respectively) and (2) the number of sequences. We compared the design effect of this optimised stepped wedge trial to the design effects of a parallel cluster-randomised trial, a cluster-randomised trial with baseline observations, and a hybrid trial design (a mixture of cluster-randomised trial and stepped wedge trial) with the same total cluster size for all designs. Results We found that a stepped wedge trial with an equal allocation to sequences is optimised by obtaining all observations after the first sequence switches and before the final sequence switches to the intervention; this means that the first sequence remains in the control condition and the last sequence remains in the intervention condition for the duration of the trial. With this design, the optimal number of sequences is [Formula: see text], where [Formula: see text] is the cluster-mean correlation, [Formula: see text] is the intracluster correlation coefficient, and m is the total cluster size. The optimal number of sequences is small when the intracluster correlation coefficient and cluster size are small and large when the intracluster correlation coefficient or cluster size is large. A cluster-randomised trial remains more efficient than the optimised stepped wedge trial when the intracluster correlation coefficient or cluster size is small. A cluster-randomised trial with baseline observations always requires a larger sample size than the optimised stepped wedge trial. The hybrid design can always give an equally or more efficient design, but will be at most 5% more efficient. We provide a strategy for selecting a design if the optimal number of sequences is unfeasible. For a non-optimal number of sequences, the sample size may be reduced by allowing a proportion of observations before the first or after the final sequence has switched. Conclusion The standard stepped wedge trial is inefficient. To reduce sample sizes when a hybrid design is unfeasible, stepped wedge trial designs should have no observations before the first sequence switches or after the final sequence switches.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Controlled implementation trials often randomize the intervention at the site level, enrolling relatively few sites (e.g., 6-20) compared to trials that randomize by subject. Trials with few sites carry a substantial risk of an imbalance between intervened (cases) and non-intervened (control) sites in important site characteristics, thereby threatening the internal validity of the primary comparison. A stepped wedge design (SWD) staggers the intervention at sites over a sequence of times or time waves until all sites eventually receive the intervention. We propose a new randomization method, sequential balance, to control time trend in site allocation by minimizing sequential imbalance across multiple characteristics. We illustrate the new method by applying it to a SWD implementation trial. METHODS:The trial investigated the impact of blended internal-external facilitation on the establishment of evidence-based teams in general mental health clinics in nine US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. Prior to randomization to start time, an expert panel of implementation researchers and health system program leaders identified by consensus a series of eight facility-level characteristics judged relevant to the success of implementation. We characterized each of the nine sites according to these consensus features. Using a weighted sum of these characteristics, we calculated imbalance scores for each of 1680 possible site assignments to identify the most sequentially balanced assignment schemes. RESULTS:From 1680 possible site assignments, we identified 34 assignments with minimal imbalance scores, and then randomly selected one assignment by which to randomize start time. Initially, the mean imbalance score was 3.10, but restricted to the 34 assignments, it declined to 0.99. CONCLUSIONS:Sequential balancing of site characteristics across groups of sites in the time waves of a SWD strengthens the internal validity of study conclusions by minimizing potential confounding. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as clinical trials # NCT02543840 ; entered 9/4/2015.

Dataset Information

The hunt for efficient, incomplete designs for stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The hunt for efficient, incomplete designs for stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment and continuous outcome measures.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets