How to design efficient cluster randomised trials
Open accessAbstract
Cluster randomised trials have diminishing returns in power and precision as cluster size increases. Making the cluster a lot larger while keeping the number of clusters fixed might yield only a very small increase in power and precision, owing to the intracluster correlation. Identifying the point at which observations start making a negligible contribution to the power or precision of the study—which we call the point of diminishing returns—is important for designing efficient trials. Current methods for identifying this point are potentially useful as rules of thumb but don’t generally work well. We introduce several practical aids to help researchers design cluster randomised trials in which all observations make a material contribution to the study. Power curves enable identification of the point at which observations begin to make a negligible contribution to a study for a given target difference. Under this paradigm, the number needed per arm under individual randomisation gives an upper bound on the cluster size, which should not be exceeded. Corresponding precision curves can be useful for accommodating flexibility in the choice of target difference and show the point at which confidence intervals around the estimated effect size no longer decrease. To design efficient trials, the number of clusters and cluster size should be determined concurrently, not independently. Funders and researchers should be aware of diminishing returns in cluster trials. Researchers should routinely plot power or precision curves when performing sample size calculations so that the implications of cluster sizes can be transparent. Even when data appear to be “free,” in the sense that few resources are needed to obtain the data, excessive cluster sizes can have important ramifications
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Ignoring the nonindependence of observations within clusters results in misestimation of the variance components and consequently an inflated type I error rate.
“Ignoring the nonindependence of observations within clusters results in misestimation of the variance components and consequently an inflated type I error rate.”
From Evaluation of the type I error rate when using parametric bootstrap analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial with binary outcomes and a small number of clusters (2022) · cites this paper as [9]
The Summary points section says observations within a cluster are correlated and that the intracluster correlation coefficient must be accounted for when designing and analysing cluster randomised trials (page unavailable). It does not state that ignoring this correlation misestimates variance components or inflates the type I error rate. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Statistical considerations in the design and analysis of community intervention trials
Donner, A., & Klar, N. (1996) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(95)00511-0 · Cited by 230 · see citing works
How big should the pilot study for my cluster randomised trial be?
Eldridge, S. M., Costelloe, C. E., Kahan, B. C., Lancaster, G. A., & Kerry, S. M. (2016) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280215588242 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- [1]Eldridge S, Kerry S. Introduction. In: A practical guide to cluster randomised trials in health services research.John Wiley and Sons, 2012 10.1002/9781119966241.ch1. · DOI
- [2]Angus DC. Fusing randomized trials with big data: the key to self-learning health care systems? JAMA 2015; 314: 767- 8. 10.1001/jama.2015.7762 pmid:26305643. 26305643 · DOI
- [3]Peto R, Collins R, Gray R. Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 23- 40. 10.1016/0895-4356(94)00150-O pmid:7853045. 7853045 · DOI · Paper page
- [4]Donner A. Some aspects of the design and analysis of cluster randomization trials. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 1998; 47: 95- 113 10.1111/1467-9876.00100. · DOI
- [6]Guittet L, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P. A priori postulated and real power in cluster randomized trials: mind the gap. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005; 5: 25 10.1186/1471-2288-5-25 pmid:16109162. 16109162 PMC1190183 · DOI
- [7]Hemming K, Girling AJ, Sitch AJ, Marsh J, Lilford RJ. Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011; 11: 102 10.1186/1471-2288-11-102 pmid:21718530. 21718530 PMC3149598 · DOI
- [8]Campbell MJ, Donner A, Klar N. Developments in cluster randomized trials and statistics in medicine. Stat Med 2007; 26: 2- 19. 10.1002/sim.2731 pmid:17136746. 17136746 · DOI
- [9]Campbell M, Walters SJ. How to design, analyse and report cluster randomised trials in medicine and health related research.Statistics in Practice Wiley, 2014 10.1002/9781118763452. · DOI
- [10]Carter B. Cluster size variability and imbalance in cluster randomized controlled trials. Stat Med 2010; 29: 2984- 93. 10.1002/sim.4050 pmid:20963749. 20963749 · DOI
- [11]Woolston C. Psychology journal bans P values. Nature 2015; 519: 9- 10 10.1038/519009f. · DOI
- [12]Bland JM. The tyranny of power: is there a better way to calculate sample size? BMJ 2009; 339: b3985. 10.1136/bmj.b3985 pmid:19808754. 19808754 · DOI
- [14]Campbell MK, Mollison J, Grimshaw JM. Cluster trials in implementation research: estimation of intracluster correlation coefficients and sample size. Stat Med 2001; 20: 391- 9. 10.1002/1097-0258(20010215)20:3<391::AID-SIM800>3.0.CO;2-Z pmid:11180309. 11180309 · DOI
- [15]Taljaard M, Teerenstra S, Ivers NM, Fergusson DA. Substantial risks associated with few clusters in cluster randomized and stepped wedge designs. Clin Trials 2016; 13: 459- 63. 10.1177/1740774516634316 pmid:26940696. 26940696 · DOI
- [16]Hooper R, Bourke L. Cluster randomised trials with repeated cross sections: alternatives to parallel group designs. BMJ 2015; 350: h2925 10.1136/bmj.h2925 pmid:26055828. 26055828 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kiratipaisarl, W., Surawattanasakul, V., & Sirikul, W. (2024) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-024-06195-3 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“Additionally, organizational interventions could be more efficiently using cluster parallel [102] or step-wedge design RCTs [103], which harness collective compliance within physician clusters in the same specialties.”
BackgroundGolzarri-Arroyo, L., Dickinson, S. L., Jamshidi-Naeini, Y., Zoh, R. S., Brown, A. W., Owora, A. H., Li, P., Oakes, J. M., & Allison, D. B. (2022) · Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine · doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.106654 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hemming, K., Eldridge, S., Forbes, G., Weijer, C., & Taljaard, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- Western University (CA)
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Hemming, K
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2017-07-14
- Volume
- 358
- Pages
- j3064
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- PMC
- PMC5508848
- OpenAlex
- W2735694213
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 19.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Keywords
- sample size determination, cluster size, power curve, intra-cluster correlation, number of clusters, trial design efficiency
- MeSH terms
- Health Services Research, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Research Design, Cluster Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Guidelines as Topic, Sample Size
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