Reitsma Angela, Chu Rong, Thorpe Julia, McDonald Sarah, Thabane Lehana, Hutton Eileen
Midwifery Education Program, McMaster University, 1280 Main St, W,, MDCL 2210, Hamilton, ON L8S 4 K1, Canada.
Trials. 2014 Sep 26;15:377. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-377.
Clustering of outcomes at centers involved in multicenter trials is a type of center effect. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement recommends that multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should account for center effects in their analysis, however most do not. The Early External Cephalic Version (EECV) trials published in 2003 and 2011 stratified by center at randomization, but did not account for center in the analyses, and due to the nature of the intervention and number of centers, may have been prone to center effects. Using data from the EECV trials, we undertook an empirical study to compare various statistical approaches to account for center effect while estimating the impact of external cephalic version timing (early or delayed) on the outcomes of cesarean section, preterm birth, and non-cephalic presentation at the time of birth.
The data from the EECV pilot trial and the EECV2 trial were merged into one dataset. Fisher's exact method was used to test the overall effect of external cephalic version timing unadjusted for center effects. Seven statistical models that accounted for center effects were applied to the data. The models included: i) the Mantel-Haenszel test, ii) logistic regression with fixed center effect and fixed treatment effect, iii) center-size weighted and iv) un-weighted logistic regression with fixed center effect and fixed treatment-by-center interaction, iv) logistic regression with random center effect and fixed treatment effect, v) logistic regression with random center effect and random treatment-by-center interaction, and vi) generalized estimating equations.
For each of the three outcomes of interest approaches to account for center effect did not alter the overall findings of the trial. The results were similar for the majority of the methods used to adjust for center, illustrating the robustness of the findings.
Despite literature that suggests center effect can change the estimate of effect in multicenter trials, this empirical study does not show a difference in the outcomes of the EECV trials when accounting for center effect.
The EECV2 trial was registered on 30 July 30 2005 with Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN 56498577.
多中心试验中各中心结局的聚集是一种中心效应。《试验报告统一标准》建议多中心随机对照试验(RCT)在分析中应考虑中心效应,但大多数试验并未这样做。2003年和2011年发表的早期外倒转术(EECV)试验在随机分组时按中心分层,但在分析中未考虑中心因素,并且由于干预的性质和中心数量,可能容易受到中心效应的影响。利用EECV试验的数据,我们进行了一项实证研究,以比较在估计外倒转术时机(早期或延迟)对剖宫产、早产和出生时非头先露结局的影响时,各种考虑中心效应的统计方法。
将EECV预试验和EECV2试验的数据合并为一个数据集。采用Fisher精确检验法来检验未校正中心效应的外倒转术时机的总体效应。将七种考虑中心效应的统计模型应用于这些数据。这些模型包括:i)Mantel-Haenszel检验;ii)具有固定中心效应和固定治疗效应的逻辑回归;iii)中心规模加权和iv)具有固定中心效应和固定治疗与中心交互作用的未加权逻辑回归;iv)具有随机中心效应和固定治疗效应的逻辑回归;v)具有随机中心效应和随机治疗与中心交互作用的逻辑回归;以及vi)广义估计方程。
对于三个感兴趣的结局中的每一个,考虑中心效应的方法均未改变试验的总体结果。用于校正中心的大多数方法的结果相似,这说明了研究结果的稳健性。
尽管有文献表明中心效应可改变多中心试验中的效应估计,但这项实证研究并未显示在考虑中心效应时EECV试验的结果存在差异。
EECV2试验于2005年7月30日在“当前受控试验”注册:ISRCTN 56498577。