IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0208876.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed effects approach to the analysis of the stepped wedge cluster randomised trial—Investigating the confounding effect of time through simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Alecia Nickless
  • Merryn Voysey
  • John Geddes
  • Ly-Mee Yu
  • Thomas R Fanshawe

Abstract

Background: A stepped wedge cluster randomised trial (SWCRT) is a multicentred study which allows an intervention to be rolled out at sites in a random order. Once the intervention is initiated at a site, all participants within that site remain exposed to the intervention for the remainder of the study. Methods: Motivated by a SWCRT of self-monitoring for bipolar disorder, we conducted a simulation study to compare model formulations to analyse data from a SWCRT under 36 different scenarios in which time was related to the outcome (improvement in mood score). The aim was to find a model specification that would produce reliable estimates of intervention effects under different scenarios. Nine different formulations of a linear mixed effects model were fitted to these datasets. These models varied in the specification of calendar and exposure times. Results: Modelling the effects of the intervention was best accomplished by including terms for both calendar time and exposure time. Treating time as categorical (a separate parameter for each measurement time-step) achieved the best coverage probabilities and low bias, but at a cost of wider confidence intervals compared to simpler models for those scenarios which were sufficiently modelled by fewer parameters. Treating time as continuous and including a quadratic time term performed similarly well, with slightly larger variations in coverage probability, but narrower confidence intervals and in some cases lower bias. The impact of misspecifying the covariance structure was comparatively small. Conclusions: We recommend that unless there is a priori information to indicate the form of the relationship between time and outcomes, data from SWCRTs should be analysed with a linear mixed effects model that includes separate categorical terms for calendar time and exposure time. Prespecified sensitivity analyses should consider the different formulations of these time effects in the model, to assess their impact on estimates of intervention effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Alecia Nickless & Merryn Voysey & John Geddes & Ly-Mee Yu & Thomas R Fanshawe, 2018. "Mixed effects approach to the analysis of the stepped wedge cluster randomised trial—Investigating the confounding effect of time through simulation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0208876
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0208876
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0208876&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0208876?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Boris A. Brühmann & Klaus Kaier & Rieka Warth & Erik Farin-Glattacker, 2023. "Cost–benefit analysis of the CoCare intervention to improve medical care in long-term care nursing homes: an analysis based on claims data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1343-1355, November.
    2. Lara Maleyeff & Fan Li & Sebastien Haneuse & Rui Wang, 2023. "Assessing exposure‐time treatment effect heterogeneity in stepped‐wedge cluster randomized trials," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2551-2564, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0208876. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.