PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 7302310

[Some methodological questions about randomizing collective units (author's transl)].

Abstract

Trials often consist in comparing two samples, or more, which have been differently treated. Often these two samples are obtained by choosing individuals at random. Yet it may be easier, or even unavoidable, to randomize groups rather than individuals. It this case, the accuracy of estimates, that is the significance level of tests is different. In order to evaluate them, it is necessary to take into account a possible "cluster effect". On the basis of the two-stage sampling theory, it is possible to build a Student-like test. Nevertheless, the convergence towards a Student variable is slower than in the case of an individual randomization. Thus, the approximation cannot always be accepted. Aside from this question of how to build a correct test, the fact is that randomization by group most often means a loss of efficiency. The loss may result from the homogeneity of the clusters, from their unequal sizes and from the fact that the degrees of freedom are fewer. Sometimes, one can limit the loss by using a sampling technique which at least takes into account the sizes of the clusters.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Padieu. 1981. [Some methodological questions about randomizing collective units (author's transl)].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7302310/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Cancer mortality in a synthetic spinning plant in Besançon, France.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the mortality of a cohort of workers in a synthetic textile spinning plant and to evaluate the relationship between mortality from lung, liver and bladder cancer and the processes or the products used. METHODS: The study population consisted of male workers present for at least 6 months in the plant from 1968 to 1984. The cohort was followed until 1999. Vital status and the causes of death were determined by consulting national registries. The population of the Franche-Comté region was used for comparison. In total, 17 groups of exposure were assessed by the industrial hygienist, based on the consensus of an expert group that determined the exposure levels of each job to selected occupational hazards. Each worker was assigned to one or several groups, according to his occupational history. Confounding factors could not be assessed. Standardised mortality ratios (SMR) and 95% bilateral confidence intervals were calculated based on an assumed Poisson distribution of the number of cases to compare the plant mortality and the population mortality. Internal analyses were performed with Cox models in order to assess the risks of death related to the various exposures. RESULTS: In the whole cohort, mortality from all malignant neoplasms was lower than expected, but this was not significant. All the estimated SMRs were lower than or close to 1. The "hot -line fitters" (RR = 2.13; n = 9; 1.06 to 4.29) and the "fibre-drawing workers" (RR = 1.83; n = 20;1.09 to 3.07) experienced a statistically significant excess in mortality from lung cancer. A slightly elevated but not significant risk of death related to lung cancer (RR = 1.5; n = 41; 0.8 to 2.7) was observed in the groups with the highest exposure to mineral fibres. A statistically significant increase in cancer deaths was observed for workers with high exposure to dust (higher intensity: RR = 1.42; n = 79; 1.06 to 1.89). CONCLUSION: Some findings, mainly of lung cancer, justify further exploration in other plants in this industry.

Epidemiologic Methods↗

Mortality in Iraq.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Epidemiologic Methods↗