ArticleTrials2024
Re-analysis of data from cluster randomised trials to explore the impact of model choice on estimates of odds ratios: study protocol.
Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Covariate adjustment in cluster randomised trials: a practical guide.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Warnings on the inclusion of cluster randomized trials in meta-analysis: results of a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are numerous approaches available to analyse data from cluster randomised trials. These include cluster-level summary methods and individual-level methods accounting for clustering, such as generalised estimating equations and generalised linear mixed models. There has been much methodological work showing that estimates of treatment effects can vary depending on the choice of approach, particularly when estimating odds ratios, essentially because the different approaches target different estimands.
methodsIn this manuscript, we describe the protocol for a planned re-analysis of data from a large number of cluster randomised trials. Our main objective is to examine empirically whether and how odds ratios estimated using different approaches (for both primary and secondary binary outcomes) vary in cluster randomised trials. We describe the methods that will be used to identify the datasets for inclusion and how they will be analysed and reported. DISCUSSION: There have been a number of small comparisons of empirical differences between the different approaches to analysis for CRTs. The systematic approach outlined in this protocol will allow a much deeper understanding of when there are important choices around the model approach and in which settings. This will be of importance given the heightened awareness of the importance of estimands and the specification of statistical analysis plans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.