Simulating data from two-arm cluster randomized trials (CRTs) and partially-nested individually randomized group treatment trials (IRGTs) using base R

Overview

In a previous blogpost, Comprehending complex designs: Cluster randomized trials, I walked through the nuances and challenges of cluster randomized trials (CRTs). Cluster randomized trials randomize groups of individuals, such as families or clinics, rather than individuals themselves. Cluster randomized trials are used for a variety of reasons, including evaluating the spread of infectious disease within a household or evaluating whether a new intervention is effective or feasible in real-world settings. Participants within the same cluster may share the same environment or care provider, for example, leading to correlated responses. If this intracluster correlation is not accounted for, variances will be underestimated and inference methods will not have the operating characteristics (i.e., type I error) we expect. Linear mixed models represent one approach for obtaining cluster-adjusted estimates, and their application was demonstrated using data from the SHARE cluster trial evaluating different sex ed curriculums (interventions) in schools (clusters).

Individually randomized group treatment trials (IRGTs) are closely related to CRTs, but can require slightly more complex analytic strategies. IRGT designs arise naturally when individuals do not initially belong to a group or cluster, but are individually randomized to receive a group-based intervention or receive treatment through a shared agent. As a result, individuals are independent at baseline, but intracluster correlation can increase with follow-up as individuals interact within their respective group or with their shared agent. IRGTs can be “fully-nested,” meaning that both the control and experimental conditions feature a group-based intervention, or “partially-nested,” meaning that the experimental condition is group-based while the control arm is not. A fully-nested IRGT may be used to compare structured group therapy versus group discussion for mental health outcomes, for example. If both arms feature groups and the same intracluster correlation, analysis of fully-nested IRGTs is practically identical to that of CRTs. In comparison, a partially-nested IRGT may be used to compare group therapy versus individual standard of care or a waitlist control, for example. Analysis of partially-nested IRGTs is more complex because intracluster correlation is only present in one arm, and methods must be adapted to handle heterogeneous covariance or correlation matrices. If fully-nested but arms do not share the same correlation, similar considerations are required.

To provide insight into data generating mechanisms and inference, this blog post demonstrates how to simulate normally distributed outcomes from (1) a two-arm cluster randomized trial and (2) a two-arm, partially-nested individually randomized group treatment trial. I only use base R for data generation, so these approaches can be widely implemented. Simulation of complex trial designs is helpful for sample size calculation and understanding operating characteristics of inference methods in different scenarios, such as small samples. Analysis of the simulated data proceeds using linear mixed models fit by the nlme library. Visualization uses ggplot2.

Continue reading Simulating data from two-arm cluster randomized trials (CRTs) and partially-nested individually randomized
group treatment trials (IRGTs) using base R

Practical inference for win measures via U-statistic decomposition

Introduction

In a previous blogpost, I described how complex estimation of U-statistic variance can be simplified using a “structural component” approach introduced by Sen (1960). The structural component approach is very similar to the leave-one-out jackknife. Essentially, the idea behind both of these approaches is that we decompose the statistic into individual contributions. Here, these are referred to as “structural components,” and in the LOO jackknife, these are referred to as “pseudo-values” or sometimes “pseudo-observations.” Construction of these individual quantities differs conceptually somewhat, but in another blogpost, I discuss their one-to-one relationship for specific cases. We can then take the sample variance of these individual contributions to estimate the variance of the statistic.

Estimators for increasingly popular win measures, including the win probability, net benefit, win odds, and win ratio, are obtained using large-sample two-sample U-statistic theory. Variance estimators are complex for these measures, requiring the calculation of multiple joint probabilities.

Here, I demonstrate how variance estimation for win measures can be practically estimated in two-arm randomized trials using a structural component approach. Results and estimators are provided for the win probability, the net benefit, and the win odds. For simplicity, only a single outcome is considered. However, extension to hierarchical composite outcomes is immediate with use of an appropriate kernel function.

Continue reading Practical inference for win measures via U-statistic decomposition

Comprehending complex designs: Cluster randomized trials

Well, well, well…

Look who decided to show up – the end of the year. Entirely unexpected and completely unforeseeable, bringing with it a strange but satisfying mix of chaos and comfort. Somehow we continue to find ourselves in this showdown again and again – 2 blog posts down, 1 to go.

Looking at date stamps, at least I'm late right on time.

Looking at date stamps, at least I’m late right on time.

As in previous years, this year’s final blog post is brought to you by the mantra: “Write what you know.” My research interests revolve around correlated data and randomized controlled trials. This includes handling of multiple primary endpoints or longitudinal endpoints in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in particular their implications in the design and analysis of cluster randomized trials.

🌈 ⭐ 🌈 ⭐ 🌈 ⭐

On this episode of Statisticelle, we will explore the nuances of cluster randomized trials featuring a single endpoint. Freely accessible data from a real cluster randomized trial will be used to demonstrate the analysis of individual-level outcomes using linear mixed models and the nlme library in R.

🌈 ⭐ 🌈 ⭐ 🌈 ⭐

Continue reading Comprehending complex designs: Cluster randomized trials