Cohort versus cross-sectional design in large field trials: precision, sample size, and a unifying model.
about
An overview of the "Positive Action for Today's Health" (PATH) trial for increasing walking in low income, ethnic minority communitiesApplication of a nonrandomized stepped wedge design to evaluate an evidence-based quality improvement intervention: a proof of concept using simulated data on patient-centered medical homes.More appropriate evaluation methods for community-level health interventions. Introduction to the special issue.Methods in health service research. Evaluation of health interventions at area and organisation level.Analysis of cluster randomized trials with repeated cross-sectional binary measurements.An evaluation of analysis options for the one-group-per-condition design. Can any of the alternatives overcome the problems inherent in this design?Design of the Trial of Activity in Adolescent Girls (TAAG).Application of a hierarchical model incorporating intrafamily correlation and cluster effects.The CORE study protocol: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to test a co-design technique to optimise psychosocial recovery outcomes for people affected by mental illness in the community mental health settingThe need to balance merits and limitations from different disciplines when considering the stepped wedge cluster randomized trial design.The importance and role of intracluster correlations in planning cluster trialsTwenty Years of Neighborhood Effect Research: An Assessment.The MM-CGI Cerebral Palsy: modification and pretesting of an instrument to measure anticipatory grief in parents whose child has cerebral palsy.Gimme 5 fruit, juice, and vegetables for fun and health: outcome evaluation.Improved standard error estimator for maintaining the validity of inference in cluster randomized trials with a small number of clusters.Social mobilization and social marketing to promote NaFeEDTA-fortified soya sauce in an iron-deficient population through a public-private partnership.The Effects of an Injury Prevention Program on Landing Biomechanics Over Time.Understanding the cluster randomised crossover design: a graphical illustraton of the components of variation and a sample size tutorial.Methods for sample size determination in cluster randomized trials.Sample size considerations for GEE analyses of three-level cluster randomized trials.Sample size requirements to detect an intervention by time interaction in longitudinal cluster randomized clinical trials with random slopes.Identifying, recruiting, and assessing social networks at high risk for HIV/AIDS: methodology, practice, and a case study in St Petersburg, Russia.Impact of non-uniform correlation structure on sample size and power in multiple-period cluster randomised trials.A simple sample size formula for analysis of covariance in cluster randomized trials.Effects of the 5th and 7th grade enhanced versions of the keepin' it REAL substance use prevention curriculum.A multi-level intervention in worksites to increase fruit and vegetable access and intake: Rationale, design and methods of the 'Good to Go' cluster randomized trial.A five-year evaluation of intervention in diabetes care in Trinidad and Tobago.Promoting energy-balance behaviors among ethnically diverse adolescents: overview and baseline findings of The Central Texas CATCH Middle School Project.A comparison of the statistical power of different methods for the analysis of repeated cross-sectional cluster randomization trials with binary outcomes.Statistical power for nonequivalent pretest-posttest designs. The impact of change-score versus ANCOVA models.Statistical models appropriate for designs often used in group-randomized trials.Recruitment strategies in a cluster randomized trial - cost implicationsPublic Mosquito Abatement: A Cluster Randomized Experiment
P2860
Q28397285-793994A4-C447-4EF1-8C4A-A65EA995F59CQ31138314-039E5A16-E23A-4B9B-89A7-E1742FD22A9BQ33582664-0E18B332-6218-489D-A77B-8330B665200BQ33704553-D0E33C46-C615-43B3-ADBF-7123B2171D9CQ34141702-8DEF3658-FD5C-4FBF-8F8E-D751A26B4137Q34323533-861C9DA8-2A01-43DC-9268-61F3373527F8Q34520493-D902F903-15D6-45A5-BA72-3D45B1A7FBB5Q34927835-4547A4CB-6741-44E8-8861-780452E676DCQ35278031-117EC7B3-3B27-40F3-A747-94428C79B10AQ35826614-1EFEAFCA-E80F-4D71-84BC-45F95ED1CE13Q36938220-9699E5E3-F168-404C-A8B6-CA8EE15E22BDQ37607892-13DE0EF3-067B-4BDA-9756-826CCF6B2992Q38153096-AF8E758B-D7DD-4833-831F-BE85FBD27158Q38554407-272F15E2-B75D-4664-8FC4-DE811977DDFEQ38995536-C812A1DB-FDEC-4A46-A7FD-A64899BBC3D1Q39867118-FB7A10D8-2194-47A0-85C3-81DD6D96DE11Q40080699-144932CD-34F6-4959-9D53-02FF84D9217CQ41413688-F86A4321-DA76-473E-A4EB-0F1176C641C9Q41902827-889C3B17-ACA6-4887-A185-131A4A28F9EBQ42738432-99A3BD8E-CBE5-41E2-8819-9328FA28F2DFQ43240924-45EA3706-62CA-4A9B-86E2-A607C447A085Q43738072-5582B28E-128B-4634-B1D1-E3D106BF5FC6Q47182483-E0D6CF3E-9D04-45CF-8DE7-FE993159E2C6Q47316206-DC7D8013-514E-4650-A1B7-131035E25618Q47347916-10940758-1D63-442A-9E1E-B4260983B692Q47574749-DB50CBF7-17F0-4069-BCDC-22A365862539Q50141232-792B686B-5ADC-4EA9-8138-CB86494BE78BQ50906234-F6AC29DB-9250-4D95-A16F-C7CB6E2CFD64Q51647550-2D8B82EE-4820-4423-B298-687F4B0D05C0Q52067856-940A0814-50C8-4EB2-96D6-66563DE83996Q52931262-13FDBC97-450C-4991-BBC5-169CDB3E2AFEQ57404862-B4D5C162-E614-4EAF-92AD-B9E5F98BBFFFQ59245063-6EF4FEED-C71C-47E3-83C3-1FBC19F4A53A
P2860
Cohort versus cross-sectional design in large field trials: precision, sample size, and a unifying model.
description
1994 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
1994年の論文
@ja
1994年論文
@yue
1994年論文
@zh-hant
1994年論文
@zh-hk
1994年論文
@zh-mo
1994年論文
@zh-tw
1994年论文
@wuu
1994年论文
@zh
1994年论文
@zh-cn
name
Cohort versus cross-sectional ...... le size, and a unifying model.
@en
type
label
Cohort versus cross-sectional ...... le size, and a unifying model.
@en
prefLabel
Cohort versus cross-sectional ...... le size, and a unifying model.
@en
P356
P1476
Cohort versus cross-sectional ...... le size, and a unifying model.
@en
P2093
Feldman HA
McKinlay SM
P356
10.1002/SIM.4780130108
P407
P577
1994-01-01T00:00:00Z