The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of methods for estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient for binary responses in cancer prevention cluster randomized trials
Open accessAbstract
The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) is a fundamental parameter of interest in cluster randomized trials as it can greatly affect statistical power. We compare common methods of estimating the ICC in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes, with a specific focus on their application to community-based cancer prevention trials with primary outcome of self-reported cancer screening. Using three real data sets from cancer screening intervention trials with different numbers and types of clusters and cluster sizes, we obtained point estimates and 95% confidence intervals for the ICC using five methods: the analysis of variance estimator, the Fleiss-Cuzick estimator, the Pearson estimator, an estimator based on generalized estimating equations and an estimator from a random intercept logistic regression model. We compared estimates of the ICC for the overall sample and by study condition. Our results show that ICC estimates from different methods can be quite different, although confidence intervals generally overlap. The ICC varied substantially by study condition in two studies, suggesting that the common practice of assuming a common ICC across all clusters in the trial is questionable. A simulation study confirmed pitfalls of erroneously assuming a common ICC. Investigators should consider using sample size and analysis methods that allow the ICC to vary by study condition.
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
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
Generalized, Linear, and Mixed Models
McCulloch, C. E., & Searle, S. R. (2000) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471722073 · Cited by 2,994
The R Package geepack for Generalized Estimating Equations
Halekoh, U., Højsgaard, S., & Yan, J. (2006) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v015.i02 · Cited by 1,907
Correlated Binary Regression with Covariates Specific to Each Binary Observation
Prentice, R. L. (1988) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531733 · Cited by 856
Prentice, R. L., & Zhao, L. P. (1991) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532642 · Cited by 542
Estimating equations for association structures
Yan, J., & Fine, J. (2004) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1650 · Cited by 523
Modelling multivariate binary data with alternating logistic regressions
CAREY, V., ZEGER, S. L., & DIGGLE, P. (1993) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/80.3.517 · Cited by 514
A Covariance Estimator for GEE with Improved Small‐Sample Properties
Mancl, L. A., & DeRouen, T. A. (2001) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.00126.x · Cited by 493
Design and analysis of clinical trials with clustering effects due to treatment
Roberts, C., & Roberts, S. A. (2005) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1191/1740774505cn076oa · Cited by 299
A Survey of Methods for Analyzing Clustered Binary Response Data
Pendergast, J. F., Gange, S. J., Newton, M. A., Lindstrom, M. J., Palta, M., & Fisher, M. R. (1996) · International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique · doi:10.2307/1403425 · Cited by 270
Cited by
Jayne, D., Pigazzi, A., Marshall, H., Croft, J., Corrigan, N., Copeland, J., Quirke, P., West, N., Rautio, T., Thomassen, N., et al. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.7219 · Cited by 1,450
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
Ramberg, J., & Modin, B. (2019) · Social Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s11218-019-09486-6 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, S., Crespi, C. M., & Wong, W. K.
- Venue
- Contemporary Clinical Trials
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 869-880
- ISSN
- 1551-7144 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2003528089
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 4.49
- 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: Comparison of methods for estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient for binary responses in cancer prevention cluster randomized trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cct.2012.05.004
- The paper
- Wu, S., Crespi, C. M., & Wong, W. K. (2012). Comparison of methods for estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient for binary responses in cancer prevention cluster randomized trials. Contemporary Clinical Trials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2012.05.004
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.