The mixed model for repeated measures for cluster randomized trials: a simulation study investigating bias and type I error with missing continuous data
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Mel & Enid Zuckerman Coll Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol & BiostatIssue Date
2020-02-07Keywords
Cluster trialsDropout
Group randomized trials
Intention-to-treat
Missing data
Variance components
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
BMCCitation
Bell, M.L., Rabe, B.A. The mixed model for repeated measures for cluster randomized trials: a simulation study investigating bias and type I error with missing continuous data. Trials 21, 148 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4114-9Journal
TRIALSRights
© The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Background Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are a design used to test interventions where individual randomization is not appropriate. The mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) is a popular choice for individually randomized trials with longitudinal continuous outcomes. This model's appeal is due to avoidance of model misspecification and its unbiasedness for data missing completely at random or at random. Methods We extended the MMRM to cluster randomized trials by adding a random intercept for the cluster and undertook a simulation experiment to investigate statistical properties when data are missing at random. We simulated cluster randomized trial data where the outcome was continuous and measured at baseline and three post-intervention time points. We varied the number of clusters, the cluster size, the intra-cluster correlation, missingness and the data-generation models. We demonstrate the MMRM-CRT with an example of a cluster randomized trial on cardiovascular disease prevention among diabetics. Results When simulating a treatment effect at the final time point we found that estimates were unbiased when data were complete and when data were missing at random. Variance components were also largely unbiased. When simulating under the null, we found that type I error was largely nominal, although for a few specific cases it was as high as 0.081. Conclusions Although there have been assertions that this model is inappropriate when there are more than two repeated measures on subjects, we found evidence to the contrary. We conclude that the MMRM for CRTs is a good analytic choice for cluster randomized trials with a continuous outcome measured longitudinally.Note
Open access journalISSN
1745-6215PubMed ID
32033617Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1186/s13063-020-4114-9
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Related articles
- Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
- Authors: Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, Moraleda C, Rogers L, Daniels K, Green P
- Issue date: 2022 Feb 1
- Single time point comparisons in longitudinal randomized controlled trials: power and bias in the presence of missing data.
- Authors: Ashbeck EL, Bell ML
- Issue date: 2016 Apr 12
- Comparison of population-averaged and cluster-specific models for the analysis of cluster randomized trials with missing binary outcomes: a simulation study.
- Authors: Ma J, Raina P, Beyene J, Thabane L
- Issue date: 2013 Jan 23
- Intent-to-treat analysis of cluster randomized trials when clusters report unidentifiable outcome proportions.
- Authors: DeSantis SM, Li R, Zhang Y, Wang X, Vernon SW, Tilley BC, Koch G
- Issue date: 2020 Dec
- Imputation strategies for missing binary outcomes in cluster randomized trials.
- Authors: Ma J, Akhtar-Danesh N, Dolovich L, Thabane L, CHAT investigators
- Issue date: 2011 Feb 16