Studying Group Behaviour: Cluster Randomized Clinical Trials
American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine
Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2013, Pages: 5-15
Received: May 16, 2013; Published: Jun. 10, 2013
Views 3108      Downloads 135
Authors
Charles J. Kowalski, Health and Behavioral Sciences IRB, Office of the Vice President for Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
Adam J. Mrdjenovich, Health and Behavioral Sciences IRB, Office of the Vice President for Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
Article Tools
PDF
Follow on us
Abstract
Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are experiments in which clusters of persons, rather than the persons themselves, are randomized to receive one of the interventions being studied. The use of CRTs has been increasing in response to the attention being paid to pragmatic as opposed to explanatory clinical trials, comparative effectiveness research, and community health promotional activities. We describe and illustrate the use of CRTs in these and other applications. Special attention is paid to ethical challenges in the design of such studies, and to tools for facilitating the implementation of interventions found to be efficacious in the trial into everyday clinical practice or effective community-wide programs. We argue that while CRTs have many useful and valid applications, there can be times when their use should be precluded due to ethical constraints. Special vigilance is required in research carried out in developing countries, where villages often seem to be a natural choice for clusters, but considerations of ‘standard of care’ may lead to control villages receiving no care or services. Full-fledged randomized controlled trials are not required to show that people who are doing poorly because of living in squalid conditions without proper sanitation and health care will, in the absence of change, continue to do so.
Keywords
Clinical Trials, Pragmatic Trials, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Health Promotional Activities, International Research, Ethics, Implementation Science, Ecological Validity
To cite this article
Charles J. Kowalski, Adam J. Mrdjenovich, Studying Group Behaviour: Cluster Randomized Clinical Trials, American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013, pp. 5-15. doi: 10.11648/j.ajcem.20130101.12
References
[1]
Sackett, D.L., and J.E. Wennberg. 1997. Choosing the best research design for each question: It’s time to stop squabbling over the "best" methods. British Medical Journal 315: 1636.
[2]
Lambert, M.F., and J. Wood. 2000. Incorporating patient preferences into randomized trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 53: 163-66.
[3]
MRC. 2002. Cluster randomized trials: Methodological and ethical considerations. MRC clinical trial series. Available at www.mrc.ac.uk
[4]
Hutton, J.L. 2001. Are distinctive ethical principles required for cluster randomized controlled trials? Statistics in Medicine 20: 473-88.
[5]
Klar, N., and A. Donner. 2001. Current and future challenges in the design and analysis of cluster randomization trials. Statistics in Medicine 20: 3729-40.
[6]
Donner, A. 1998. Some aspects of the design and analysis of cluster randomization trials. Applied Statistics 47: 95-113.
[7]
Kowalski, C.J. 2010. Pragmatic problems with clinical equipoise. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 53: 161-73.
[8]
Kowalski, C.J. 2013. Comparative effectiveness research: Decision-bases evidence making. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
[9]
Puffer, S., D.J. Torgerson, and J. Watson. 2003. Evidence of risk of bias in cluster randomized trials: Review of recent trials published in three general medical journals. British Medical Journal 327: 785-9.
[10]
Donner, A., K.S. Brown, and P. Brasher. 1990. A methodological review of non-therapeutic intervention trials employing cluster randomization, 1979-1989. International Journal of Epidemiology 19: 795-800.
[11]
Simpson, J.M., N. Klar, and A. Donner. 1995. Accounting for cluster randomization: A review of primary prevention trials, 1990 through 1993. American Journal of Public Health 85: 1378-83.
[12]
Raudenbush, S.W. 1997. Statistical analysis and optimal design for cluster randomized trials. Psychological Methods 2: 173-85.
[13]
Turner, R.M., R.Z. Omar, and S.G. Thompson. 2001. Bayesian methods of analysis for cluster randomized trials with binary outcome data. Statistics in Medicine 20: 453-72.
[14]
Spiegelhalter, D.J. 2001. Bayesian methods for cluster randomized trials with continuous responses. Statistics in Medicine 20: 435-52.
[15]
Matsuyama, Y., J. Sakamoto, and Y. Ohashi. 1998. A Bayesian hierarchical survival model for the institutional effects in a multi-centre cancer clinical trial. Statistics in Medicine 17: 1893-1908.
[16]
Campbell, M.K., D.R. Elbourne, and D.G. Altman for the CONSORT Group. 2004. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster management trials. British Medical Journal 328: 702-8.
[17]
Woolf, S.H. 2008. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. Journal of the American Medical Association 299: 211-3.
[18]
Szilagyi, P.G. 2009. Translational research and pediatrics. Academic Pediatrics 9: 71-80.
[19]
Maienschein, J., M. Sunderland, R.A. Ankeny, and J.S. Robert. 2008. The ethos and ethics of translational research. American Journal of Bioethics 8: 43-51.
[20]
Sofaer, N., and N. Eyal. 2010. The diverse ethics of translational research. American Journal of Bioethics 10: 19-30.
[21]
Torgerson, D.J. 2001. Contamination in trials: is cluster randomization the answer? British Medical Journal 322: 355-7.
[22]
Kowalski, C.J. 2013. When ethics precludes randomization: Put prospective, matched-pair, observational studies to work. Perspectives in Biology & Medicine In press.
[23]
Kowalski, C.J. 2013. Pharmacovigilance: Why watchful waiting will work. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics In press.
[24]
Sabin, J.E., K. Mazor, V. Meterko, S.L. Goff, and R. Platt. 2008. Comparing drug effectiveness at health plans: The ethics of cluster randomized trials. Hastings Center Report 35: 39-48.
[25]
Luce, B.R., J.M. Kramer, S.N. Goodman, et al. 2009. Rethinking randomized clinical trials for comparative effectiveness research: The need for transformational change. Annals of Internal Medicine 151: 206-9.
[26]
Kowalski, C.J., S. Pennell, and A. Vinokur. 2008. Felicitometry: Measuring the ‘quality’ in quality of life. Bioethics 22: 307-13.
[27]
Kowalski, C.J., J. Bernheim, N.A. Birk, and P. Theuns. 2012. Felicitometric hermeneutics: Interpreting quality of life measurements. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33: 207-20.
[28]
Sox, H.C., and S. Greenfield. 2009. Comparative effectiveness research: A report from the Institute of Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine 151: 203-5.
[29]
Nellesen, D., H.G. Birnbaum, and P.E. Greenberg. 2010. Perspectives on comparative effectiveness research: Views from diverse constituencies. Pharmacoeconomics 28: 789-98.
[30]
Edwards, S.J., D.A. Braunholtz, R.J. Lilford, and A.J. Stevens. 1999. Ethical issues in the design and conduct of cluster randomized trials. British Medical Journal 318: 1407-9.
[31]
Weijer, C., J.M. Grimshaw, M. Taljaard, A. Binik, R. Boruch, et al. 2011. Ethical issues posed by cluster randomized trials in health research. Trials 12: http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/12/1/100
[32]
Emanuel, E.J., D. Wendler, and C. Grady. 2000. What makes clinical research ethical? Journal of the American Medical Association 283: 2701-11.
[33]
Donner, A. and N. Klar. 2004. Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health 94: 416-22.
[34]
Weijer C., J.M. Grimshaw, M.P. Eccles, A.D. McRae, A. White, et al. 2012. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomized Trials. PloS Med 9: e1001346. Doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001346
[35]
Glasgow, R.E., T.M. Vogt, and S.M. Boles. 1999. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health 89: 1322-7.
[36]
Shubert, T.E., M. Altpeter, and J. Busby-Whitehead. 2011. Using the RE-AIM framework to translate a research-based falls prevention intervention into a community-based program: Lessons learned. Journal of Safety Research 42: 509-16.
[37]
Meyer, C., S. Ulbricht, B. Gross, et al. 2012. Adoption, reach and effectiveness of computer-based, practitioner delivered and combined smoking interventions in general medical practices: A three-arm cluster randomized trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 121: 124-32.
[38]
Kowalski, C.J., and A. Mrdjenovich. 2013. Patient preference clinical trials: Why and when they will sometimes be preferred. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
[39]
McKenzie, J.E., S.D. French, D.A. O’Connor, et al. 2008. IMPLEmenting a clinical practice guideline for acute lower back pain evidence-based management in general practice (IMPLEMENT): Cluster randomized controlled study protocol. Available at www.implementationscience.com/content/3/1/11.
[40]
Lavery, J.V., C. Grady, E.R. Wahl, and E.J. Emanuel, eds. 2007. Ethical issues in international biomedical research: A casebook. New York: Oxford University Press.
[41]
Glanz, K., B. Rimer, and C. Lerman. 1996. Ethical issues in the design and conduct of community based intervention studies. In: Ethics and epidemiology, S. S. Coughlin and T. L. Beauchamp, eds. New York: Oxford University Press.
[42]
Emanuel, E.J., D. Wendler J. Killen, and C. Grady. 2004. What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. Journal of Infectious Diseases 189: 930-7.
[43]
Emanuel, E.J., D. Wendler, and C. Grady. 2008. An ethical framework for biomedical research. In: The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics, E.J. Emanuel, C. Grady, R.A. Crouch et al, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 123-35.
[44]
Emanuel, E.J., and C. Weijer. 2005. Protecting communities in research. In: Belmont revisited: Ethical principles for research with human subjects, J.E. Childress, E.M. Meslin, and H.T. Shapiro, eds. Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 165 – 83.
[45]
Bhutta, Z.A. 2007. Did the SEARCH neonatal sepsis trial violate the Declaration of Helsinki? In: Ethical issues in international biomedical research, J.V. Lavery, C. Grady, E.R. Wahl, and E.J. Emanuel, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 109-14.
[46]
Angell, M. 2007. The SEARCH neonatal sepsis study: Was it ethical? In: Ethical issues in international biomedical research, J.V. Lavery, C. Grady, E.R. Wahl, and E.J. Emanuel, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 114-5.
[47]
Kowalski, C.J. 2013. Clinical trials of new drug products: What gets compared to whom? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
[48]
Lavery, J.V. 2007. The challenge of clinical equipoise in the Tigray malaria trial. In: Ethical issues in international biomedical research, J.V. Lavery, C. Grady, E.R. Wahl, and E.J. Emanuel, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 119-26.
[49]
Singh, J. 2007. Could the investigators forsee the outcome of the Tigray trial? In: Ethical issues in international biomedical research, J.V. Lavery, C. Grady, E.R. Wahl, and E.J. Emanuel, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 126-30.
[50]
Bolton, B., J. Bass, R. Neugebauer, et al. 2003. Group interpersonal psychotherapy for depression in rural Uganda. Journal of the American Medical Association 289: 3117-24.
[51]
Hunt, S.M. 1998. Cross-cultural issues in the use of quality of life measures in randomized controlled trials. In: Quality of life assessment in clinical trials, M.J. Staquet, R.D. Hayes, and P.M. Fayers, eds. Oxford University Press, pp. 51-67.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186