Unaccounted clustering assumptions still compromise inferences in cluster randomized trials in orthodontic research
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objective: This meta-epidemiological study aimed to determine whether optimal sample size calculation was applied in orthodontic cluster randomized trials (CRTs). Methods: Orthodontic randomized clinical trials with a cluster design, published between January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2023, in leading orthodontic journals were sourced. Study selection was undertaken by two independent authors. The study characteristics and variables required for sample size calculation were also extracted by the authors. The design effect for each trial was calculated using an intra-cluster correlation coefficient of 0.1 and the number of teeth in each cluster to recalculate the sample size. Descriptive statistics for the study characteristics, summary values for the design effect, and sample sizes were provided. Results: One-hundred and five CRTs were deemed eligible for inclusion. Of these, 100 reported sample size calculation. Nine CRTs (9.0%) did not report any effect measures for the sample size calculation, and a few did not report any power assumptions or significance levels or thresholds. Regarding the specific variables for the cluster design, only one CRT reported a design effect and adjusted the sample size accordingly. Recalculations indicated that the sample size of orthodontic CRTs should be increased by a median of 50% to maintain the same statistical power and significance level. Conclusions: Sample size calculations in orthodontic cluster trials were suboptimal. Greater awareness of the cluster design and variables is required to calculate the sample size adequately, to reduce the practice of underpowered studies.
Abstract
Objective: This meta-epidemiological study aimed to determine whether optimal sample size calculation was applied in orthodontic cluster randomized trials (CRTs). Methods: Orthodontic randomized clinical trials with a cluster design, published between January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2023, in leading orthodontic journals were sourced. Study selection was undertaken by two independent authors. The study characteristics and variables required for sample size calculation were also extracted by the authors. The design effect for each trial was calculated using an intra-cluster correlation coefficient of 0.1 and the number of teeth in each cluster to recalculate the sample size. Descriptive statistics for the study characteristics, summary values for the design effect, and sample sizes were provided. Results: One-hundred and five CRTs were deemed eligible for inclusion. Of these, 100 reported sample size calculation. Nine CRTs (9.0%) did not report any effect measures for the sample size calculation, and a few did not report any power assumptions or significance levels or thresholds. Regarding the specific variables for the cluster design, only one CRT reported a design effect and adjusted the sample size accordingly. Recalculations indicated that the sample size of orthodontic CRTs should be increased by a median of 50% to maintain the same statistical power and significance level. Conclusions: Sample size calculations in orthodontic cluster trials were suboptimal. Greater awareness of the cluster design and variables is required to calculate the sample size adequately, to reduce the practice of underpowered studies.
참고문헌 (26)
- Altman DG, "Statistics notes. Units of analysis", BMJ, 314, pp.1874~ (1997)[DOI]
- Sedgwick P, "Unit of observation versus unit of analysis", BMJ, 348, pp.g3840~ (2014)[DOI]
- Ahn C, "Sample size calculations for clustered and longitudinal outcomes in clinical research" (2014), CRC Press
- Hayes RJ, "Cluster randomised trials" (2017), CRC Press
- Koletsi D, "Does published orthodontic research account for clustering effects during statistical data analysis?", Eur J Orthod, pp.287~292 (2012)[DOI]
- Fleming PS, "Are clustering effects accounted for in statistical analysis in leading dental specialty journals?", J Dent, 41, pp.265~270 (2013)[DOI]
- Altman DG, "Statistics and ethics in medical research : III how large a sample?", Br Med J, 281, pp.1336~1338 (1980)[DOI]
- Mheissen S, "Do sample size calculations in longitudinal orthodontic trials use the advantages of this study design?", Angle Orthod, 92, pp.402~408 (2022)[DOI]
- Eldridge SM, "Sample size for cluster randomized trials : effect of coefficient of variation of cluster size and analysis method", Int J Epidemiol, 35, pp.1292~1300 (2006)[DOI]
- Hayes RJ, "Simple sample size calculation for cluster-randomized trials", Int J Epidemiol, 28, pp.319~326 (1999)[DOI]
- Pandis N, "Dental research waste in design, analysis, and reporting : a scoping review", J Dent Res, 100, pp.245~252 (2021)[DOI]
- Koletsi D, "Sample size in orthodontic randomized controlled trials : are numbers justified?", Eur J Orthod, 36, pp.67~73 (2014)[DOI]
- Alabdullah MM, "Effect of fluoride-releasing resin composite in white spot lesions prevention : a single-centre, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial", Eur J Orthod, 39, pp.634~640 (2017)[DOI]
- Meinhold L, "Clustering effects of oral conditions based on clinical and radiographic examinations", Clin Oral Investig, 24, pp.3001~3008 (2020)[DOI]
- Masood M, "The clustering effects of surfaces within the tooth and teeth within individuals", J Dent Res, 94, pp.281~288 (2015)[DOI]
- Kerry SM, "Analysis of a trial randomised in clusters", BMJ, 316, pp.54~ (1998)[DOI]
- Sudiskumar N, "Accounting for clustering is still not routinely undertaken in orthodontic studies", Eur J Orthod, 45, pp.45~50 (2023)[DOI]
- Rutterford C, "Reporting and methodological quality of sample size calculations in cluster randomized trials could be improved : a review", J Clin Epidemiol, 68, pp.716~723 (2015)[DOI]
- Schulz KF, "CONSORT 2010 statement : updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials", BMJ, 340, pp.c332~ (2010)[DOI]
- Koletsi D, "Are sample sizes clear and justified in RCTs published in dental journals?", PLoS One, 9, pp.e85949~ (2014)[DOI]
- Campbell MK, "Consort 2010 statement : extension to cluster randomised trials", BMJ, 345, pp.e5661~ (2012)[DOI]
- Devereaux PJ, "The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the consolidated standards of reporting trials(CONSORT)checklist", Control Clin Trials, 23, pp.380~388 (2002)[DOI]
- Hopewell S, "Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact factor medical journals : a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to authors'", Trials, 9, pp.20~ (2008)[DOI]
- Schulz KF, "Sample size calculations in randomised trials : mandatory and mystical", Lancet, 365, pp.1348~1353 (2005)[DOI]
- Harrison JE, "Why does clustering matter in orthodontic trials?", Eur J Orthod, 34, pp.293~295 (2012)[DOI]
- Cohen J, "A power primer", Psychol Bull, 112, pp.155~159 (1992)