The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Unaccounted clustering assumptions still compromise inferences in cluster randomized trials in orthodontic research

  • Received : 2024.03.19
  • Accepted : 2024.07.21
  • Published : 2024.11.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This meta-epidemiological study aimed to determine whether optimal sample size calculation was applied in orthodontic cluster randomized trials (CRTs). Methods: Orthodontic randomized clinical trials with a cluster design, published between January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2023, in leading orthodontic journals were sourced. Study selection was undertaken by two independent authors. The study characteristics and variables required for sample size calculation were also extracted by the authors. The design effect for each trial was calculated using an intra-cluster correlation coefficient of 0.1 and the number of teeth in each cluster to recalculate the sample size. Descriptive statistics for the study characteristics, summary values for the design effect, and sample sizes were provided. Results: One-hundred and five CRTs were deemed eligible for inclusion. Of these, 100 reported sample size calculation. Nine CRTs (9.0%) did not report any effect measures for the sample size calculation, and a few did not report any power assumptions or significance levels or thresholds. Regarding the specific variables for the cluster design, only one CRT reported a design effect and adjusted the sample size accordingly. Recalculations indicated that the sample size of orthodontic CRTs should be increased by a median of 50% to maintain the same statistical power and significance level. Conclusions: Sample size calculations in orthodontic cluster trials were suboptimal. Greater awareness of the cluster design and variables is required to calculate the sample size adequately, to reduce the practice of underpowered studies.

Keywords

References

  1. Altman DG, Bland JM. Statistics notes. Units of analysis. BMJ 1997;314:1874. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1874 
  2. Sedgwick P. Unit of observation versus unit of analysis. BMJ 2014;348:g3840. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3840 
  3. Ahn C, Heo M, Zhang S. Sample size calculations for clustered and longitudinal outcomes in clinical research. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014. https://search. worldcat.org/ko/title/895661007 
  4. Hayes RJ, Moulton LH. Cluster randomised trials. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017. https://search.worldcat.org/ko/title/993775208 
  5. Koletsi D, Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T. Does published orthodontic research account for clustering effects during statistical data analysis? Eur J Orthod 2012;34:287-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr122 
  6. Fleming PS, Koletsi D, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T, Pandis N. Are clustering effects accounted for in statistical analysis in leading dental specialty journals? J Dent 2013;41:265-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.11.012 
  7. Altman DG. Statistics and ethics in medical research: III how large a sample? Br Med J 1980;281:1336-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.281.6251.1336 
  8. Mheissen S, Seehra J, Khan H, Pandis N. Do sample size calculations in longitudinal orthodontic trials use the advantages of this study design? Angle Orthod 2022;92:402-8. https://doi.org/10.2319/091321-707.1 
  9. Eldridge SM, Ashby D, Kerry S. Sample size for cluster randomized trials: effect of coefficient of variation of cluster size and analysis method. Int J Epidemiol 2006;35:1292-300. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyl129 
  10. Hayes RJ, Bennett S. Simple sample size calculation for cluster-randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol 1999;28:319-26. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/28.2.319 
  11. Pandis N, Fleming PS, Katsaros C, Ioannidis JPA. Dental research waste in design, analysis, and reporting: a scoping review. J Dent Res 2021;100:245-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034520962751 
  12. Koletsi D, Pandis N, Fleming PS. Sample size in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: are numbers justified? Eur J Orthod 2014;36:67-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt005 
  13. Alabdullah MM, Nabawia A, Ajaj MA, Saltaji H. Effect of fluoride-releasing resin composite in white spot lesions prevention: a single-centre, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod 2017;39:634-40. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx010 
  14. Meinhold L, Krois J, Jordan R, Nestler N, Schwendicke F. Clustering effects of oral conditions based on clinical and radiographic examinations. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24:3001-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03164-9 
  15. Masood M, Masood Y, Newton JT. The clustering effects of surfaces within the tooth and teeth within individuals. J Dent Res 2015;94:281-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034514559408 
  16. Kerry SM, Bland JM. Analysis of a trial randomised in clusters. BMJ 1998;316:54. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7124.54 
  17. Sudiskumar N, Cobourne MT, Pandis N, Seehra J. Accounting for clustering is still not routinely undertaken in orthodontic studies. Eur J Orthod 2023;45:45-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjac066 
  18. Rutterford C, Taljaard M, Dixon S, Copas A, Eldridge S. Reporting and methodological quality of sample size calculations in cluster randomized trials could be improved: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:716-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.006 
  19. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c332. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c332 
  20. Koletsi D, Fleming PS, Seehra J, Bagos PG, Pandis N. Are sample sizes clear and justified in RCTs published in dental journals? PLoS One 2014;9:e85949. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085949 
  21. Campbell MK, Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG; CONSORT Group. Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2012;345:e5661. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e5661 
  22. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) checklist. Control Clin Trials 2002;23:380-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0197-2456(02)00214-3 
  23. Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to authors'. Trials 2008;9:20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-9-20 
  24. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical. Lancet 2005;365:1348-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)61034-3 
  25. Harrison JE, Burnside G. Why does clustering matter in orthodontic trials? Eur J Orthod 2012;34:293-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs026 
  26. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992;112:155-9. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155