MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165583239 · doi:10.1177/17407745211020852

Intra-cluster correlations from the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank to inform the design of longitudinal cluster trials

2021· article· en· W3165583239 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Korevaar, Jessica Kasza, Monica Taljaard, Karla Hemming, Terry Haines, Elizabeth L. Turner, JA Thompson, James P. Hughes, Andrew B Forbes

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Trials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMonash UniversityEuropean CommissionMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsCorrelationAutocorrelationCluster (spacecraft)Interquartile rangeStatisticsCorrelation coefficientEconometricsMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sample size calculations for longitudinal cluster randomised trials, such as crossover and stepped-wedge trials, require estimates of the assumed correlation structure. This includes both within-period intra-cluster correlations, which importantly differ from conventional intra-cluster correlations by their dependence on period, and also cluster autocorrelation coefficients to model correlation decay. There are limited resources to inform these estimates. In this article, we provide a repository of correlation estimates from a bank of real-world clustered datasets. These are provided under several assumed correlation structures, namely exchangeable, block-exchangeable and discrete-time decay correlation structures. METHODS: Longitudinal studies with clustered outcomes were collected to form the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank. Forty-four available continuous outcomes from 29 datasets were obtained and analysed using each correlation structure. Patterns of within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficient and cluster autocorrelation coefficients were explored by study characteristics. RESULTS: The median within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficient for the discrete-time decay model was 0.05 (interquartile range: 0.02-0.09) with a median cluster autocorrelation of 0.73 (interquartile range: 0.19-0.91). The within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients were similar for the exchangeable, block-exchangeable and discrete-time decay correlation structures. Within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients and cluster autocorrelations were found to vary with the number of participants per cluster-period, the period-length, type of cluster (primary care, secondary care, community or school) and country income status (high-income country or low- and middle-income country). The within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients tended to decrease with increasing period-length and slightly decrease with increasing cluster-period sizes, while the cluster autocorrelations tended to move closer to 1 with increasing cluster-period size. Using the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank, an RShiny app has been developed for determining plausible values of correlation coefficients for use in sample size calculations. DISCUSSION: This study provides a repository of intra-cluster correlations and cluster autocorrelations for longitudinal cluster trials. This can help inform sample size calculations for future longitudinal cluster randomised trials.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.473
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.757
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4730.757
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.960
GPT teacher head0.676
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TrialsSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207