The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Small sample performance of bias‐corrected sandwich estimators for cluster‐randomized trials with binary outcomes
Open accessAbstract
The sandwich estimator in generalized estimating equations (GEE) approach underestimates the true variance in small samples and consequently results in inflated type I error rates in hypothesis testing. This fact limits the application of the GEE in cluster‐randomized trials (CRTs) with few clusters. Under various CRT scenarios with correlated binary outcomes, we evaluate the small sample properties of the GEE Wald tests using bias‐corrected sandwich estimators. Our results suggest that the GEE Wald z‐test should be avoided in the analyses of CRTs with few clusters even when bias‐corrected sandwich estimators are used. With t‐distribution approximation, the Kauermann and Carroll (KC)‐correction can keep the test size to nominal levels even when the number of clusters is as low as 10 and is robust to the moderate variation of the cluster sizes. However, in cases with large variations in cluster sizes, the Fay and Graubard (FG)‐correction should be used instead. Furthermore, we derive a formula to calculate the power and minimum total number of clusters one needs using the t‐test and KC‐correction for the CRTs with binary outcomes. The power levels as predicted by the proposed formula agree well with the empirical powers from the simulations. The proposed methods are illustrated using real CRT data. We conclude that with appropriate control of type I error rates under small sample sizes, we recommend the use of GEE approach in CRTs with binary outcomes because of fewer assumptions and robustness to the misspecification of the covariance structure. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Design and analysis of group-randomized trials: a review of recent methodological developments
Murray, D. M., Varnell, S. P., & Blitstein, J. L. (2004) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.94.3.423 · Cited by 677
Sample Size Calculations for Studies with Correlated Observations
Liu, G., & Liang, K.-Y. (1997) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533554 · Cited by 306
Eldridge, S. M., Ashby, D., Feder, G. S., Rudnicka, A. R., & Ukoumunne, O. C. (2004) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1191/1740774504cn006rr · Cited by 288
Sample size and power calculations with correlated binary data
Pan, W. (2001) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(01)00131-3 · Cited by 85
Cited by
Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods
Morris, T. P., White, I. R., & Crowther, M. J. (2019) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.8086 · Cited by 1,305
Cluster randomized trials with a small number of clusters: which analyses should be used?
Leyrat, C., Morgan, K. E., Leurent, B., & Kahan, B. C. (2018) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyx169 · Cited by 244
Review of recent methodological developments in group-randomized trials: part 2—analysis
Turner, E. L., Prague, M., Gallis, J. A., Li, F., & Murray, D. M. (2017) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.303707 · Cited by 195
Kahan, B. C., Forbes, G., Ali, Y., Jairath, V., Bremner, S., Harhay, M. O., Hooper, R., Wright, N., Eldridge, S. M., & Leyrat, C. (2016) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1571-2 · Cited by 185
Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: a scoping review
Zhan, D., Xu, L., Ouyang, Y., Sawatzky, R., & Wong, H. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0255389 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, P., & Redden, D. T.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-10-24
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 281-296
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W1822978939
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Small sample performance of bias‐corrected sandwich estimators for cluster‐randomized trials with binary outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sim.6344
- The paper
- Li, P., & Redden, D. T. (2015). Small sample performance of bias‐corrected sandwich estimators for cluster‐randomized trials with binary outcomes. Statistics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6344
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.