Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters

Open access
Hemming, Karla, Girling, Alan J, Sitch, Alice J, Marsh, Jennifer, Lilford, Richard J·2011·BMC Medical Research Methodology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cluster randomised controlled trials (CRCTs) are frequently used in health service evaluation. Assuming an average cluster size, required sample sizes are readily computed for both binary and continuous outcomes, by estimating a design effect or inflation factor. However, where the number of clusters are fixed in advance, but where it is possible to increase the number of individuals within each cluster, as is frequently the case in health service evaluation, sample size formulae have been less well studied. METHODS: We systematically outline sample size formulae (including required number of randomisation units, detectable difference and power) for CRCTs with a fixed number of clusters, to provide a concise summary for both binary and continuous outcomes. Extensions to the case of unequal cluster sizes are provided. RESULTS: For trials with a fixed number of equal sized clusters (k), the trial will be feasible provided the number of clusters is greater than the product of the number of individuals required under individual randomisation (nI) and the estimated intra-cluster correlation (ρ). So, a simple rule is that the number of clusters (k) will be sufficient provided: [formula in text]. Where this is not the case, investigators can determine the maximum available power to detect the pre-specified difference, or the minimum detectable difference under the pre-specified value for power. CONCLUSIONS: Designing a CRCT with a fixed number of clusters might mean that the study will not be feasible, leading to the notion of a minimum detectable difference (or a maximum achievable power), irrespective of how many individuals are included within each cluster.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2288-11-102

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 317

Metadata

Authors
Hemming, K., Girling, A. J., Sitch, A. J., Marsh, J., & Lilford, R. J.
Venue
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published
2011-06-30
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
102-102
ISSN
1471-2288 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2130796303
Cited by
317
References
20
FWCI
8.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2288-11-102
The paper
Hemming, K., Girling, A. J., Sitch, A. J., Marsh, J., & Lilford, R. J. (2011). Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Medical Research Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-102

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.