The analysis of continous outcomes in multi-centre trials with small centre sizes

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 26, Issue 30, 2007, Pages 5445-5456

  Pickering, Ruth M ^a,c   Weatherall, Mark ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^c SOUTHAMPTON GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Blocking; Fixed effects; Inter block information; Multi centre trials; Non orthogonality; Random effects; Small centres; Stratification

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPRESSION; EFFECT SIZE; HEALTH CENTER; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; POWER ANALYSIS; PSYCHOTHERAPY; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRATIFICATION; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; EQUIPMENT; METHODOLOGY; NURSING; REPRODUCIBILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DEPRESSION; EFFECT MODIFIERS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; MULTICENTER STUDIES AS TOPIC; PSYCHOTHERAPY; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 38849151542     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3068     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Points to consider on adjustment for baseline covariates. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:701-709.
2. Tony Kendrick T, Simons L, Mynors-Wallis L, Gray A, Lathlean J, Pickering R, Harris S, Rivero-Arias O, Gerard K, Thompson C. Cost-effectiveness of referral for generic or problem-solving treatment from community mental health nurses, compared with usual general practitioner care for common mental disorders: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 2006; 189:50-59.
3. Caradoc-Davies TH, Weatherall M, Dixon GS. Medications and their monitoring in Parkinson's disease in Dunedin. New Zealand Medical Journal 1992 105:212-214.
4. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. The Lancet 2001; 357:1191-1194.
5. Smeeth L, Sui-Woon Ng E. Intraclass correlation coefficients for cluster randomized trials in primary care: data from the MRC trial of the assessment and management of older people in the community. Controlled Clinical Trials 2002; 23:409-421.
6. Adams G, Gulliford MC, Ukoumunne OC, Eldridge A, Chinn S, Campbell MJ. Patterns of intra-cluster correlation from primary care research to inform study design and analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2004; 57:785-794.
7. Senn S. The many modes of meta. Drug Information Journal 2000; 34:535-549.
8. Brown HK, Kempton RA. The application of REML in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1994; 13:1601-1617.
9. SAS® Institute Inc. SAS Version 8.2 for Windows. SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, U.S.A., 2001.
10. Khuri AI, Mathew T, Sinha BK. Statistical Tests for Mixed Linear Models. Wiley: New York, 1998.
11. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ. Statistics with Confidence (2nd edn). BMJ Publishing Group: London, 2000.
12. Moerbeek MM, van Breukelen GJP, Berger MPF. A comparison between traditional methods and multilevel regression for the analysis of multicenter intervention studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2003; 56:341-350.
13. van Breukelen GJP, Candel MJJM, Berger MPF. Relative efficiency of unequal versus equal cluster sizes in cluster randomised and multicentre trials. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:2589-2603.
14. Statistical principles for clinical trials E9. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, 1998.