Cited by 104Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Individually Randomized Group Treatment Trials: A Critical Appraisal of Frequently Used Design and Analytic Approaches

Open access
Pals, Sherri L., Murray, David M., Alfano, Catherine M., Shadish, William R., Hannan, Peter J., Baker, William L.·2008·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objectives. We reviewed published individually randomized group treatment (IRGT) trials to assess researchers’ awareness of within-group correlation and determine whether appropriate design and analytic methods were used to test for treatment effectiveness. Methods. We assessed sample size and analytic methods in IRGT trials published in 6 public health and behavioral health journals between 2002 and 2006. Results. Our review included 34 articles; in 32 (94.1%) of these articles, inappropriate analytic methods were used. In only 1 article did the researchers claim that expected intraclass correlations (ICCs) were taken into account in sample size estimation; in most articles, sample size was not mentioned or ICCs were ignored in the reported calculations. Conclusions. Trials in which individuals are randomly assigned to study conditions and treatments administered in groups may induce within-group correlation, violating the assumption of independence underlying commonly used statistical methods. Methods that take expected ICCs into account should be used in reexamining past studies and planning future studies to ensure that interventions are not judged effective solely on the basis of statistical artifacts. We strongly encourage investigators to report ICCs from IRGT trials and describe study characteristics clearly to aid these efforts.

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 · 10.2105/ajph.2007.127027

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [1]Cornfield J. Randomization by group: a formal analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 1978;108:100–102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [3]Murray DM. Design and Analysis of Group-Randomized Trials. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc; 1998.
  3. [8]Kish L. Survey Sampling. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1965.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pals, S. L., Murray, D. M., Alfano, C. M., Shadish, W. R., Hannan, P. J., & Baker, W. L.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2008-08
Volume
98
Issue
8
Pages
1418-1424
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W2064994313
Cited by
104
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
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 › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
within-group correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient, sample size determination, statistical analysis methods, cluster randomization, treatment effectiveness, public health interventions, behavioral health interventions, reporting quality
MeSH terms
Biometry, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Research Design, Public Health Practice, Randomized Controlled Trials 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