Studies with Staggered Starts: Multiple Baseline Designs and Group-randomized Trials

Overview

Journal Am J Public Health

Specialty Public Health

Date 2011 Sep 24

PMID 21940928

Citations 34

Authors

Dale A Rhoda

David M Murray

Rebecca R Andridge

Michael L Pennell

Erinn M Hade

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: Multiple baseline designs (MBDs) have been suggested as alternatives to group-randomized trials (GRT). We reviewed structural features of MBDs and considered their potential effectiveness in public health research. We also reviewed the effect of staggered starts on statistical power.

Methods: We reviewed the MBD literature to identify key structural features, recent suggestions that MBDs be adopted in public health research, and the literature on power in GRTs with staggered starts. We also computed power for MBDs and GRTs.

Results: The features that have contributed to the success of small MBDs in some fields are not likely to translate well to public health research. MBDs can be more powerful than GRTs under some conditions, but those conditions involve assumptions that require careful evaluation in practice.

Conclusions: MBDs will often serve better as a complement of rather than as an alternative to GRTs. GRTs may employ staggered starts for logistical or ethical reasons, but this will always increase their duration and will often increase their cost.

Citing Articles

Chronic periodontitis, dantamoolaroga, indicates chronic systemic inflammation and reduces longevity.

Stringer G J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2024; 15(6):101048.

PMID: 39626590 PMC: 11647617. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaim.2024.101048.

Randomized-controlled trials are methodologically inappropriate in adolescent transgender healthcare.

Ashley F, Tordoff D, Olson-Kennedy J, Restar A Int J Transgend Health. 2024; 25(3):407-418.

PMID: 39055634 PMC: 11268232. DOI: 10.1080/26895269.2023.2218357.

Interventions targeting young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) for increased likelihood of return to school or employment-A systematic review.

Stea T, Bertelsen T, Fegran L, Sejersted E, Kleppang A, Fyhn T PLoS One. 2024; 19(6):e0306285.

PMID: 38935788 PMC: 11210863. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306285.

Challenges in Evaluating a Community-Level Intervention to Address Root Causes of Youth Violence.

Mehari K, Smith P, Morton B, Billingsley J, Coleman J, Farrell A Prev Sci. 2024; 25(5):774-785.

PMID: 38733468 PMC: 11321925. DOI: 10.1007/s11121-024-01678-7.

Effectiveness of Bio-K+ for the prevention of infection: Stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Leal J, Shen Y, Faris P, Dalton B, Sabuda D, Ocampo W Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2023; 45(4):443-451.

PMID: 38073551 PMC: 11007362. DOI: 10.1017/ice.2023.169.

References

Bulte I, Onghena P . Randomization tests for multiple-baseline designs: an extension of the SCRT-R package. Behav Res Methods. 2009; 41(2):477-85. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.477. View

Onghena P, Edgington E . Customization of pain treatments: single-case design and analysis. Clin J Pain. 2004; 21(1):56-68. DOI: 10.1097/00002508-200501000-00007. View

Hussey M, Hughes J . Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2006; 28(2):182-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2006.05.007. View

Brown C, Lilford R . The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006; 6:54. PMC: 1636652. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-54. View

Kazdin A . Methodological and interpretive problems of single-case experimental designs. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1978; 46(4):629-42. DOI: 10.1037//0022-006x.46.4.629. View

Ferron J, Bell B, Hess M, Rendina-Gobioff G, Hibbard S . Making treatment effect inferences from multiple-baseline data: the utility of multilevel modeling approaches. Behav Res Methods. 2009; 41(2):372-84. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.372. View

Hawkins N, Sanson-Fisher R, Shakeshaft A, DEste C, Green L . The multiple baseline design for evaluating population-based research. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 33(2):162-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.03.020. View

Fishbein M . Great expectations, or do we ask too much from community-level interventions?. Am J Public Health. 1996; 86(8):1075-6. PMC: 1380609. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.86.8_pt_1.1075. View

Sanson-Fisher R, Bonevski B, Green L, DEste C . Limitations of the randomized controlled trial in evaluating population-based health interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 33(2):155-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.04.007. View

10.

. The Gambia Hepatitis Intervention Study. The Gambia Hepatitis Study Group. Cancer Res. 1987; 47(21):5782-7. View

11.

Brown C, Wyman P, Guo J, Pena J . Dynamic wait-listed designs for randomized trials: new designs for prevention of youth suicide. Clin Trials. 2006; 3(3):259-71. DOI: 10.1191/1740774506cn152oa. View

12.

Baer D, Wolf M, Risley T . Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 1968; 1(1):91-7. PMC: 1310980. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91. View

13.

Biglan A, Ary D, Wagenaar A . The value of interrupted time-series experiments for community intervention research. Prev Sci. 2001; 1(1):31-49. PMC: 4553062. DOI: 10.1023/a:1010024016308. View

14.

Matyas T, Greenwood K . Visual analysis of single-case time series: Effects of variability, serial dependence, and magnitude of intervention effects. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990; 23(3):341-51. PMC: 1286245. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-341. View