Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Different methods to analyze stepped wedge trial designs revealed different aspects of intervention effects.
Twisk, J W R; Hoogendijk, E O; Zwijsen, S A; de Boer, M R.
Afiliação
  • Twisk JW; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: jwr.twisk@vumc.nl.
  • Hoogendijk EO; EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of General Practice & Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Gérontopôle, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
  • Zwijsen SA; EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of General Practice & Elderly Care Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • de Boer MR; EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Section Methodology and Applied Biostatistics, Department of Health Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 72: 75-83, 2016 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26586107
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Within epidemiology, a stepped wedge trial design (i.e., a one-way crossover trial in which several arms start the intervention at different time points) is increasingly popular as an alternative to a classical cluster randomized controlled trial. Despite this increasing popularity, there is a huge variation in the methods used to analyze data from a stepped wedge trial design. STUDY DESIGN AND

SETTING:

Four linear mixed models were used to analyze data from a stepped wedge trial design on two example data sets. The four methods were chosen because they have been (frequently) used in practice. Method 1 compares all the intervention measurements with the control measurements. Method 2 treats the intervention variable as a time-independent categorical variable comparing the different arms with each other. In method 3, the intervention variable is a time-dependent categorical variable comparing groups with different number of intervention measurements, whereas in method 4, the changes in the outcome variable between subsequent measurements are analyzed.

RESULTS:

Regarding the results in the first example data set, methods 1 and 3 showed a strong positive intervention effect, which disappeared after adjusting for time. Method 2 showed an inverse intervention effect, whereas method 4 did not show a significant effect at all. In the second example data set, the results were the opposite. Both methods 2 and 4 showed significant intervention effects, whereas the other two methods did not. For method 4, the intervention effect attenuated after adjustment for time.

CONCLUSION:

Different methods to analyze data from a stepped wedge trial design reveal different aspects of a possible intervention effect. The choice of a method partly depends on the type of the intervention and the possible time-dependent effect of the intervention. Furthermore, it is advised to combine the results of the different methods to obtain an interpretable overall result.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Projetos de Pesquisa / Modelos Lineares / Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Projetos de Pesquisa / Modelos Lineares / Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article