Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2003

Open Access 01-12-2003 | Debate

Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials

Authors: Alan A Montgomery, Tim J Peters, Paul Little

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2003

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The evaluation of more than one intervention in the same randomised controlled trial can be achieved using a parallel group design. However this requires increased sample size and can be inefficient, especially if there is also interest in considering combinations of the interventions. An alternative may be a factorial trial, where for two interventions participants are allocated to receive neither intervention, one or the other, or both. Factorial trials require special considerations, however, particularly at the design and analysis stages.

Discussion

Using a 2 × 2 factorial trial as an example, we present a number of issues that should be considered when planning a factorial trial. The main design issue is that of sample size. Factorial trials are most often powered to detect the main effects of interventions, since adequate power to detect plausible interactions requires greatly increased sample sizes. The main analytical issues relate to the investigation of main effects and the interaction between the interventions in appropriate regression models. Presentation of results should reflect the analytical strategy with an emphasis on the principal research questions. We also give an example of how baseline and follow-up data should be presented. Lastly, we discuss the implications of the design, analytical and presentational issues covered.

Summary

Difficulties in interpreting the results of factorial trials if an influential interaction is observed is the cost of the potential for efficient, simultaneous consideration of two or more interventions. Factorial trials can in principle be designed to have adequate power to detect realistic interactions, and in any case they are the only design that allows such effects to be investigated.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Grimes DA, Schulz KF: An overview of clinical research: the lay of the land. Lancet. 2002, 359: 57-61. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07283-5.CrossRefPubMed Grimes DA, Schulz KF: An overview of clinical research: the lay of the land. Lancet. 2002, 359: 57-61. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07283-5.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Watson M, Gunnell D, Peters T, Brookes S, Sharp D: Guidelines and educational outreach visits from community pharmacists to improve prescribing in general practice: a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2001, 6: 207-213. 10.1258/1355819011927503.CrossRefPubMed Watson M, Gunnell D, Peters T, Brookes S, Sharp D: Guidelines and educational outreach visits from community pharmacists to improve prescribing in general practice: a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2001, 6: 207-213. 10.1258/1355819011927503.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Montgomery AA, Fahey T, Peters TJ: A factorial randomised controlled trial of decision analysis and an information video plus leaflet for newly diagnosed hypertensive patients. Br J Gen Pract. 2003, 53: 446-453.PubMedPubMedCentral Montgomery AA, Fahey T, Peters TJ: A factorial randomised controlled trial of decision analysis and an information video plus leaflet for newly diagnosed hypertensive patients. Br J Gen Pract. 2003, 53: 446-453.PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Bankhead C, Richards SH, Peters TJ, Sharp DJ, Hobbs FDR, Brown J, et al: Improving attendance for breast screening among recent non-attenders: a randomised controlled trial of two interventions in primary care. Journal of Medical Screening. 2001, 8: 99-105. 10.1136/jms.8.2.99.CrossRefPubMed Bankhead C, Richards SH, Peters TJ, Sharp DJ, Hobbs FDR, Brown J, et al: Improving attendance for breast screening among recent non-attenders: a randomised controlled trial of two interventions in primary care. Journal of Medical Screening. 2001, 8: 99-105. 10.1136/jms.8.2.99.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Peveler R, George C, Kinmonth A-L, Campbell M, Thompson C: Effect of antidepressant drug counselling and information leaflets on adherence to drug treatment in primary care: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1999, 319: 612-615.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Peveler R, George C, Kinmonth A-L, Campbell M, Thompson C: Effect of antidepressant drug counselling and information leaflets on adherence to drug treatment in primary care: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1999, 319: 612-615.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52: 746-751.PubMedPubMedCentral Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52: 746-751.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Ottenbacher KJ: Interpretation of interaction in factorial analysis of variance design. Statistics in Medicine. 1991, 10: 1565-1571.CrossRefPubMed Ottenbacher KJ: Interpretation of interaction in factorial analysis of variance design. Statistics in Medicine. 1991, 10: 1565-1571.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, Mulheran PA, Egger M, Davey Smith G: Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess. 2001, 5 (33): Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, Mulheran PA, Egger M, Davey Smith G: Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess. 2001, 5 (33):
9.
go back to reference Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001, 357: 1191-1194. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001, 357: 1191-1194. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Senn S: Statistical issues in drug development. 1997, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd Senn S: Statistical issues in drug development. 1997, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd
11.
go back to reference Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS: Statistical methods in medical research. 2002, Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, FourthCrossRef Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS: Statistical methods in medical research. 2002, Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, FourthCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Collett D: Modelling binary data. 2003, Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC, Second Collett D: Modelling binary data. 2003, Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC, Second
13.
go back to reference Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC: Medical statistics. 2003, Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, Second Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC: Medical statistics. 2003, Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, Second
14.
go back to reference Janosky JE: Interpretation of interaction in factorial analysis of variance design – letter. Statistics in Medicine. 1992, 11: 1403-CrossRefPubMed Janosky JE: Interpretation of interaction in factorial analysis of variance design – letter. Statistics in Medicine. 1992, 11: 1403-CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials
Authors
Alan A Montgomery
Tim J Peters
Paul Little
Publication date
01-12-2003
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2003
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-26

Other articles of this Issue 1/2003

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2003 Go to the issue