MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176043026 · doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106255

CRTpowerdist: An R package to calculate attained power and construct the power distribution for cross-sectional stepped-wedge and parallel cluster randomized trials

2021· article· en· W3176043026 on OpenAlexafffund
Yongdong Ouyang, Liang Xu, Mohammad Ehsanul Karim, Paul Gustafson, Hubert Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsStatisticsPoisson distributionRandomizationCluster (spacecraft)Randomized controlled trialStatistical powerRestricted randomizationMathematicsCluster randomised controlled trialComputer scienceBinary numberSample size determinationPower (physics)MedicineArithmeticSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The attained power, calculated conditional on the realized allocation, of a clinical trial may differ from the expected power, obtained pre-randomization through averaging over all potential allocations that could be generated by the randomization algorithm (RA). For example, a two-arm trial using a RA that is expected to allocate 20 participants to each arm will attain less than the expected power if by chance it allocates 25 and 15 participants to the arms. Cluster randomized trials with unequal cluster sizes have elevated risk of realizing an allocation that yields an attained power much lower than the expected power when modest numbers of clusters are randomized. METHOD: We developed the R package CRTpowerdist, which implements both simulations and approximate analytic formulae to calculate the attained powers associated with different realized allocations and constructs the pre-randomization power distribution associated with the RA to facilitate assessing the risk of obtaining inadequate power. The package covers unequal cluster-size, cross-sectional stepped-wedge and parallel cluster randomized trials, with or without stratification. Allowed outcome types are: continuous (Gaussian), binary (Binomial) and count (Poisson). The analytic formulae-based calculations are also implemented in a Shiny app. RESULTS: The functionality of the CRTpowerdist is illustrated for each type of trial design. The examples show how to obtain the attained power, the power distribution, and the risk of low attained power, using both simulation and analytic formulae. CONCLUSION: For cluster randomized trials with unequal cluster sizes, the CRTpowerdist package can assist users in identifying an appropriate randomization algorithm by enabling the user to assess the risk that a randomization algorithm will lead to an allocation with inadequate attained power. The Shiny app makes these assessments accessible to researchers who are unable or do not wish to use the CRTpowerdist package.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.286
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.286
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1170.032

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 head0.412
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.168 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods and Programs in BiomedicineSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207