Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Voldal, EC; Xia, F; Kenny, A; Heagerty, PJ; Hughes, JP
Published in: Clin Trials
August 2022

Stepped wedge cluster randomized trials are often analysed using linear mixed effects models that may include random effects for cluster, time and/or treatment. We investigate the impact of misspecification of the random effects structure of the model. Specifically, we considered two cases of misspecification of the random effects in a cross-sectional stepped wedge cluster randomized trials model - fit a linear mixed effects model with random time effects but the true model includes random treatment effects (case 1) or fit a linear mixed effects model with random treatment effect but the true model includes random time effects (case 2) - and derived the variance of the estimated treatment effect under misspecification. We defined two measures of the effect of misspecification: validity and efficiency. Validity is the ratio of the model-based variance of the treatment effect from the mis-specified model divided by the true variance of the treatment effect from the mis-specified model (based on a sandwich estimate of the variance). Efficiency is the ratio of the model-based variance of the treatment effect from the correctly specified model divided by the true variance of the treatment effect from the mis-specified model. We found that validity is less than 1.0 (anti-conservative) in almost all situations investigated with the exception of case 1 with two sequences, when validity could be greater than 1.0. Efficiency is less than 1 in all cases and depends on the intracluster correlation coefficient, the relative magnitude of the variance of the misclassified variance component, and the number of sequences. In general, there is no universal recommendation as to the most robust approach except for the case of a classic stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with only 2 sequences, where fitting a random time model is less likely to lead to anti-conservative inference compared with fitting a random intervention model.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Clin Trials

DOI

EISSN

1740-7753

Publication Date

August 2022

Volume

19

Issue

4

Start / End Page

380 / 383

Location

England

Related Subject Headings

  • Statistics & Probability
  • Sample Size
  • Research Design
  • Linear Models
  • Humans
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Cluster Analysis
  • 5203 Clinical and health psychology
  • 4905 Statistics
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Voldal, E. C., Xia, F., Kenny, A., Heagerty, P. J., & Hughes, J. P. (2022). Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs. Clin Trials, 19(4), 380–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745221084702
Voldal, Emily C., Fan Xia, Avi Kenny, Patrick J. Heagerty, and James P. Hughes. “Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs.Clin Trials 19, no. 4 (August 2022): 380–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745221084702.
Voldal EC, Xia F, Kenny A, Heagerty PJ, Hughes JP. Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs. Clin Trials. 2022 Aug;19(4):380–3.
Voldal, Emily C., et al. “Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs.Clin Trials, vol. 19, no. 4, Aug. 2022, pp. 380–83. Pubmed, doi:10.1177/17407745221084702.
Voldal EC, Xia F, Kenny A, Heagerty PJ, Hughes JP. Random effect misspecification in stepped wedge designs. Clin Trials. 2022 Aug;19(4):380–383.
Journal cover image

Published In

Clin Trials

DOI

EISSN

1740-7753

Publication Date

August 2022

Volume

19

Issue

4

Start / End Page

380 / 383

Location

England

Related Subject Headings

  • Statistics & Probability
  • Sample Size
  • Research Design
  • Linear Models
  • Humans
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Cluster Analysis
  • 5203 Clinical and health psychology
  • 4905 Statistics
  • 3202 Clinical sciences