Skip to main content

Table 4 Percentages accounting for clustering in sample size calculations and analysis in previous reviews

From: A systematic review of cluster randomised trials in residential facilities for older people suggests how to improve quality

Authors

Source of trials

Years

Clustering accounted for

In sample size

In analysis

Donner et al. [5]

16 non-therapeutic Intervention trials

1979-1989

19%

50%

Simpson et al. [6]

21 trials from Amer J Pub Health Prev Med

1990-1993

19%

57%

Chuang et al. [7]

24 trials of computer based decision support

1975-1998

0%

58%

Isaakidis et al. [8]

51 trials in Sub-Saharan Africa

1973-2001

20%

37%

Puffer et al. [3]

36 trials in BMJ, Lancet and NEJM

1997-2002

56%

92%

Eldridge et al. [10]

152 trials in primary health care

1997-2000

9%

59%

Varnell et al. [39]

60 trials in Amer J PubHealth Prev Med

1998-2002

15%

54%

Bland [9]

18 articles in BMJ

1983-2003

n/a

72%

Eldridge et al. [4]

34 articles in primary health care

2004-2005

62%

88%

Murray et al. [38]

75 trials in oncology

2002-2006

24%

45%

Bowater et al. [11]

35 trials in tropical parasitic diseases

1998-2007

29%

43%

Handlos et al. [24]

35 trials in maternal and child health

1998-2008

71%

80%

Froud et al. [27]

23 trials in oral health

2005-2009

65%

78%

Ivers et al. [12]

300 trials of cluster design randomly selected

2000-2008

33%h

70%

This review

73 trials in residential facilities for older people

1993-2010

27% i

74%

  1. h Calculated by us for consistency with other reports, as the reported 61% excludes those trials which did not report sample size calculations.
  2. i This increases to 47% when those that did not report sample size calculations are excluded.