Dataset Information

Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To describe the prevalence of risks of bias in cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

Study design and setting

Review undertaken in duplicate of a random sample of 40 primary reports of cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions.

Results

The most common reported reasons for adopting cluster randomization were the need to avoid contamination (17, 42.5%) and practical considerations (14, 35%). Of the 40 trials all but one was assessed as being at risk of bias. A majority (27, 67.5%) were assessed as at risk due to the timing of identification and recruitment of participants; many (21, 52.5%) due to an apparent lack of adequate allocation concealment; and many due to selectively reported results (22, 55%), arising from a mixture of reasons including lack of documentation of primary outcome. Other risks mostly occurred infrequently.

Conclusion

Many cluster-randomized trials evaluating individual-level interventions appear to be at risk of bias, mostly due to identification and recruitment biases. We recommend that investigators carefully consider the need for cluster randomization; follow recommended procedures to mitigate risks of identification and recruitment bias; and adhere to good reporting practices including clear documentation of primary outcome and allocation concealment methods.

SUBMITTER: Easter C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8592576 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias.

Easter Christina C Thompson Jennifer A JA Eldridge Sandra S Taljaard Monica M Hemming Karla K

Journal of clinical epidemiology 20210629

<h4>Objectives</h4>To describe the prevalence of risks of bias in cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.<h4>Study design and setting</h4>Review undertaken in duplicate of a random sample of 40 primary reports of cluster-randomized trials of individual-level interventions.<h4>Results</h4>The most common reported reasons for adopting cluster randomization were the need to avoid contamination (17, 42.5%) and practical considerations ...[more]

PMID: 34197941

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo overcome the three delays in triage, transport and treatment that underlie adverse pregnancy outcomes, we aimed to reduce all-cause adverse outcomes with community-level interventions targeting women with pregnancy hypertension in three low-income countries.MethodsIn this individual participant-level meta-analysis, we de-identified and pooled data from the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) cluster randomised controlled trials in Mozambique, Pakistan, and India, which were run in 2014-17. Consenting pregnant women, aged 12-49 years, were recruited in their homes. Clusters, defined by local administrative units, were randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention or control groups. The control groups continued local standard of care. The intervention comprised community engagement and existing community health worker-led mobile health-supported early detection, initial treatment, and hospital referral of women with hypertension. For this meta-analysis, as for the original studies, the primary outcome was a composite of maternal or perinatal outcome (either maternal, fetal, or neonatal death, or severe morbidity for the mother or baby), assessed by unmasked trial surveillance personnel. For this analysis, we included all consenting participants who were followed up with completed pregnancies at trial end. We analysed the outcome data with multilevel modelling and present data with the summary statistic of adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs (fixed effects for maternal age, parity, maternal education, and random effects for country and cluster). This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018102564.FindingsOverall, 44 clusters (69 330 pregnant women) were randomly assigned to intervention (22 clusters [36 008 pregnancies]) or control (22 clusters [33 322 pregnancies]) groups. 32 290 (89·7%) pregnancies in the intervention group and 29 698 (89·1%) in the control group were followed up successfully. Median maternal age of included women was 26 years (IQR 22-30). In the intervention clusters, 6990 group and 16 691 home-based community engagement sessions and 138 347 community health worker-led visits to 20 819 (57·8%) of 36 008 women (of whom 11 095 [53·3%] had a visit every 4 weeks) occurred. Blood pressure and dipstick proteinuria were assessed per protocol. Few women were eligible for methyldopa for severe hypertension (181 [1%] of 20 819) or intramuscular magnesium sulfate for pre-eclampsia (198 [1%]), of whom most accepted treatment (162 [89·5%] of 181 for severe hypertension and 133 [67·2%] of 198 for pre-eclampsia). 1255 (6%) were referred to a comprehensive emergency obstetric care facility, of whom 864 (82%) accepted the referral. The primary outcome was similar in the intervention (7871 [24%] of 32 290 pregnancies) and control clusters (6516 [22%] of 29 698; adjusted OR 1·17, 95% CI 0·90-1·51; p=0·24). No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred, and few adverse effects occurred after in-community treatment with methyldopa (one [2%] of 51; India only) and none occurred after in-community treatment with magnesium sulfate or during transport to facility.InterpretationThe CLIP intervention did not reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes. Future community-level interventions should expand the community health worker workforce, assess general (rather than condition-specific) messaging, and include health system strengthening.FundingUniversity of British Columbia, a grantee of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control (2018) estimates that 1 in 59 children has autism spectrum disorder, and the annual cost of ASD in the U.S. is estimated to be $236 billion. Evidence-based interventions have been developed and demonstrate effectiveness in improving child outcomes. However, research on generalizable methods to scale up these practices in the multiple service systems caring for these children has been limited and is critical to meet this growing public health need. This project includes two, coordinated studies testing the effectiveness of the Translating Evidence-based Interventions (EBI) for ASD: Multi-Level Implementation Strategy (TEAMS) model. TEAMS focuses on improving implementation leadership, organizational climate, and provider attitudes and motivation in order to improve two key implementation outcomes-provider training completion and intervention fidelity and subsequent child outcomes. The TEAMS Leadership Institute applies implementation leadership strategies and TEAMS Individualized Provider Strategies for training applies motivational interviewing strategies to facilitate provider and organizational behavior change.MethodsA cluster randomized implementation/effectiveness Hybrid, type 3, trial with a dismantling design will be used to understand the effectiveness of TEAMS and the mechanisms of change across settings and participants. Study #1 will test the TEAMS model with AIM HI (An Individualized Mental Health Intervention for ASD) in publicly funded mental health services. Study #2 will test TEAMS with CPRT (Classroom Pivotal Response Teaching) in education settings. Thirty-seven mental health programs and 37 school districts will be randomized, stratified by county and study, to one of four groups (Standard Provider Training Only, Standard Provider Training + Leader Training, Enhanced Provider Training, Enhanced Provider Training + Leader Training) to test the effectiveness of combining standard, EBI-specific training with the two TEAMS modules individually and together on multiple implementation outcomes. Implementation outcomes including provider training completion, fidelity (coded by observers blind to group assignment) and child behavior change will be examined for 295 mental health providers, 295 teachers, and 590 children.DiscussionThis implementation intervention has the potential to increase quality of care for ASD in publicly funded settings by improving effectiveness of intervention implementation. The process and modules will be generalizable to multiple service systems, providers, and interventions, providing broad impact in community services.Trial registrationThis study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03380078 ). Registered 20 December 2017, retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias.

Objectives

Study design and setting

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cluster randomized trials of individual-level interventions were at high risk of bias.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets