Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Simple compared to covariate-constrained randomization methods in balancing baseline characteristics: a case study of randomly allocating 72 hemodialysis centers in a cluster trial
by
Garg, Amit X.
, Al-Jaishi, Ahmed A.
, Dixon, Stephanie N.
, McArthur, Eric
, Devereaux, P. J.
, Thabane, Lehana
in
Analysis of covariance
/ Balanced allocation
/ Biomedicine
/ Cluster randomized trial
/ Covariate-constrained
/ Evaluation
/ Health Sciences
/ Hemodialysis
/ Intervention
/ Medicine
/ Medicine & Public Health
/ Methods
/ Population
/ Randomization
/ Restricted randomization
/ Statistics for Life Sciences
/ Variables
2021
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Simple compared to covariate-constrained randomization methods in balancing baseline characteristics: a case study of randomly allocating 72 hemodialysis centers in a cluster trial
by
Garg, Amit X.
, Al-Jaishi, Ahmed A.
, Dixon, Stephanie N.
, McArthur, Eric
, Devereaux, P. J.
, Thabane, Lehana
in
Analysis of covariance
/ Balanced allocation
/ Biomedicine
/ Cluster randomized trial
/ Covariate-constrained
/ Evaluation
/ Health Sciences
/ Hemodialysis
/ Intervention
/ Medicine
/ Medicine & Public Health
/ Methods
/ Population
/ Randomization
/ Restricted randomization
/ Statistics for Life Sciences
/ Variables
2021
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Simple compared to covariate-constrained randomization methods in balancing baseline characteristics: a case study of randomly allocating 72 hemodialysis centers in a cluster trial
by
Garg, Amit X.
, Al-Jaishi, Ahmed A.
, Dixon, Stephanie N.
, McArthur, Eric
, Devereaux, P. J.
, Thabane, Lehana
in
Analysis of covariance
/ Balanced allocation
/ Biomedicine
/ Cluster randomized trial
/ Covariate-constrained
/ Evaluation
/ Health Sciences
/ Hemodialysis
/ Intervention
/ Medicine
/ Medicine & Public Health
/ Methods
/ Population
/ Randomization
/ Restricted randomization
/ Statistics for Life Sciences
/ Variables
2021
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Simple compared to covariate-constrained randomization methods in balancing baseline characteristics: a case study of randomly allocating 72 hemodialysis centers in a cluster trial
Journal Article
Simple compared to covariate-constrained randomization methods in balancing baseline characteristics: a case study of randomly allocating 72 hemodialysis centers in a cluster trial
2021
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Background and aim
Some parallel-group cluster-randomized trials use covariate-constrained rather than simple randomization. This is done to increase the chance of balancing the groups on cluster- and patient-level baseline characteristics. This study assessed how well two covariate-constrained randomization methods balanced baseline characteristics compared with simple randomization.
Methods
We conducted a mock 3-year cluster-randomized trial, with no active intervention, that started April 1, 2014, and ended March 31, 2017. We included a total of 11,832 patients from 72 hemodialysis centers (clusters) in Ontario, Canada. We randomly allocated the 72 clusters into two groups in a 1:1 ratio on a single date using individual- and cluster-level data available until April 1, 2013. Initially, we generated 1000 allocation schemes using simple randomization. Then, as an alternative, we performed covariate-constrained randomization based on historical data from these centers. In one analysis, we restricted on a set of 11 individual-level prognostic variables; in the other, we restricted on principal components generated using 29 baseline historical variables.
We created 300,000 different allocations for the covariate-constrained randomizations, and we restricted our analysis to the 30,000 best allocations based on the smallest sum of the penalized standardized differences. We then randomly sampled 1000 schemes from the 30,000 best allocations. We summarized our results with each randomization approach as the median (25th and 75th percentile) number of balanced baseline characteristics. There were 156 baseline characteristics, and a variable was balanced when the between-group standardized difference was ≤ 10%.
Results
The three randomization techniques had at least 125 of 156 balanced baseline characteristics in 90% of sampled allocations. The median number of balanced baseline characteristics using simple randomization was 147 (142, 150). The corresponding value for covariate-constrained randomization using 11 prognostic characteristics was 149 (146, 151), while for principal components, the value was 150 (147, 151).
Conclusion
In this setting with 72 clusters, constraining the randomization using historical information achieved better balance on baseline characteristics compared with simple randomization; however, the magnitude of benefit was modest.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.