SzilagyiPGHumistonSGStephens-ShieldsAJ, et al. Effect of training pediatric clinicians in human papillomavirus communication strategies on human papillomavirus vaccination rates: a cluster randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr2021; 175(9): 901–910.
2.
ImaiKJiangZMalaniA. Causal inference with interference and noncompliance in two-stage randomized experiments. J Am Stat Assoc2021; 116(534): 632–644.
3.
MilesCHPetersenMVan der LaanMJ. Causal inference when counterfactuals depend on the proportion of all subjects exposed. Biometrics2019; 75(3): 768–777.
4.
HudgensMGHalloranME. Toward causal inference with interference. J Am Stat Assoc2008; 103(482): 832–842.
5.
SmallDSTen HaveTRRosenbaumPR. Randomization inference in a group–randomized trial of treatments for depression: covariate adjustment, noncompliance, and quantile effects. J Am Stat Assoc2008; 103(481): 271–279.
6.
ColantuoniERosenblumM. Leveraging prognostic baseline variables to gain precision in randomized trials. Stat Med2015; 34(18): 2602–2617.
7.
StephensAJTchetgen TchetgenEJDe GruttolaV. Augmented generalized estimating equations for improving efficiency and validity of estimation in cluster randomized trials by leveraging cluster-level and individual-level covariates. Stat Med2012; 31(10): 915–930.
8.
MooreKLNeugebauerRValappilT, et al. Robust extraction of covariate information to improve estimation efficiency in randomized trials. Stat Med2011; 30(19): 2389–2408.
9.
ZhangMTsiatisAADavidianM. Improving efficiency of inferences in randomized clinical trials using auxiliary covariates. Biometrics2008; 64(3): 707–715.
10.
MurrayDM. Influential methods reports for group-randomized trials and related designs. Clin Trials. Epub ahead of print 6January2022. DOI: 10.1177/17407745211063423.
11.
MurrayDMTaljaardMTurnerEL, et al. Essential ingredients and innovations in the design and analysis of group-randomized trials. Annu Rev Public Health2020; 41: 1–19.
12.
CornfieldJ. Randomization by group: a formal analysis. Am J Epidemiol1978; 108(2): 100–102.
13.
KahanBCForbesGAliY, et al. Increased risk of type I errors in cluster randomised trials with small or medium numbers of clusters: a review, reanalysis, and simulation study. Trials2016; 17(1): 438–446.
14.
SherwinR. Controlled trials of the diet-heart hypothesis: some comments on the experimental unit. Am J Epidemiol1978; 108(2): 92–99.
MoseleyJBO’MalleyKPetersenNJ, et al. A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. N Engl J Med2002; 347(2): 81–88.
17.
HallstromAPOrnatoJPWeisfeldtM, et al. Public-access defibrillation and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med2004; 351(7): 637–646.
18.
CarnegieNBWangRNovitskyV, et al. Linkage of viral sequences among HIV-infected village residents in Botswana: estimation of linkage rates in the presence of missing data. PLoS Comput Biol2014; 10(1): e1003430.
19.
HemmingKKaszaJHooperR, et al. A tutorial on sample size calculation for multiple-period cluster randomized parallel, cross-over and stepped-wedge trials using the Shiny CRT Calculator. Int J Epidemiol2020; 49(3): 979–995.
20.
VoldalECHakhuNRXiaF, et al. swCRTdesign: an RPackage for stepped wedge trial design and analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2020; 196: 105514.
SemlerMWSelfWHWandererJP, et al. Balanced crystalloids versus saline in critically ill adults. N Engl J Med2018; 378(9): 829–839.
23.
HughesJPHeagertyPJXiaF, et al. Robust inference for the stepped wedge design. Biometrics2020; 76(1): 119–130.
24.
ProschanMA. On the distribution of the unpaired t-statistic with paired data. Stat Med1996; 15(10): 1059–1063.
25.
LiFTurnerELHeagertyPJ, et al. An evaluation of constrained randomization for the design and analysis of group-randomized trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med2017; 36(24): 3791–3806.
El-BasselNJacksonRDSametJ, et al. Introduction to the special issue on the HEALing Communities Study. Drug Alcohol Depend2020; 217: 108327.
28.
HemmingKTaljaardM. Reflection on modern methods: when is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial a good study design choice?Int J Epidemiol2020; 49(3): 1043–1052.
29.
BinikA. Delaying and withholding interventions: ethics and the stepped wedge trial. J Med Ethics2019; 45(10): 662–667.
30.
HooperREldridgeSM. Cutting edge or blunt instrument: how to decide if a stepped wedge design is right for you. BMJ Qual Saf2021; 30(3): 245–250.
31.
OrnatoJPMcBurnieMANicholG, et al. The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial: study design and rationale. Resuscitation2003; 56(2): 135–147.