Our Theses
Estimation of a risk difference in a cluster randomized trial
A cluster randomized trial (CRT) is a study design in which groups of individuals, called clusters, are randomized rather than the individuals themselves. Data then have a hierarchical structure: participants are nested within clusters, which are randomized into intervention arms. When the outcome is binary, the statistical models estimate an odds ratio (OR), while international reporting recommendations also call for the estimation of an absolute effect, i.e. a risk difference (RD). The aim of this thesis was to evaluate analytical methods for estimating a RD in ERCs via simulation studies.
For the two works of this thesis, a single simulation plan was developed to simulate a CRT with a binary outcome, individual- and cluster-level covariates, including confounding in individual-level covariates. The first work focused on individual-level analyses. Conditional (via generalized linear mixed models, GLMM) and marginal (via generalized estimating equations, GEE) approaches were compared using different link functions (identity, logit and log). For the two latter, G-computation was then used to estimate the RD. The marginal approach offered the best performance measures,
except for the convergence rate. The recommendation was therefore to use the GEE approach with an identity link function, or the GLMM approach with the identity link in case of non-convergence. A second work focused on clusterlevel analyses with adjustment on individual and cluster-level covariates. A two-stage procedure (TSP), G-computation and Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation (TMLE) were compared, along with an unadjusted method acting as a control method. Once there was adjustment, there was no longer any bias, whatever the method. The TMLE method with adjustment only for individual-level covariates (confounders) showed the best performance, particularly in terms of
estimation precision.
At the end of this work, recommendations on the statistical approach to be used to estimate an absolute intervention effect in the context of an CRT were made, to follow the reporting recommendations of the CONSORT Statement.
Methodological aspects of therapeutic studies in rare cutaneous vascular diseases
Today, therapeutic evaluation primarily relies on the randomized controlled trial with a two-parallel group design. However, for rare diseases, this standard is challenging due to the required sample sizes. Thus, this thesis set three objectives, corresponding to three distinct studies. The first objective was to review the study designs used to evaluate therapies in a given group of rare diseases, specifically rare superficial vascular anomalies (SVA), which particularly affect the pediatric population. A systematic literature review analyzing trials conducted between January 2000 and January 2021 on the treatment of rare SVA was carried out. This review helped to compile an inventory of the study designs used as well as the justifications underlying the choice of these methodological designs. The second objective aimed to deepen the analysis of a methodological design identified for the therapeutic evaluation of rare SVA, namely the "individual stepped-wedge randomized trial," in order to facilitate its implementation by determining an appropriate sample size calculation. The validity of this sample size calculation formula has then been assessed using a Monte Carlo simulation approach. Finally, the third objective of the thesis was to identify the methodological design considered most relevant by a panel of experts, to conduct clinical trials on rare SVA. This work used the international Delphi consensus method, bringing together medical experts and patient association representatives, by presenting them with various clinical and therapeutic situations. This approach led to a consensus on several specific clinical situations, thus providing a basis to guide future therapeutic studies in rare SVA.
Randomization of nursing homes and risk of attrition: choice of design and analysis strategy
In a cluster randomized trial, randomization units are groups of individuals, rather than individuals themselves. Nursing homes are facilities for older adults in need of care. Regarding the type of intervention assessed in such settings, cluster randomized trial is as a well-adapted design. With the global ageing of the population, trials in nursing homes are required but still underrepresented and the reasons are, among others, methodological issues such as the high risk of attrition, essentially due to death. The objective of this PhD thesis was to provide a validated approach to estimate an intervention effect when a cluster randomized trial is planned in nursing homes and faces the risk of a high rate of discontinuation due to death. In the first part of this work we investigated, through a methodological review, the strategies used to deal with that attrition. The review was based on reports of cluster randomized trials planned in nursing homes and published between 2005 and 2020 in selected general medicine and geriatric journals with high impact factors. In the second part of this work, we focused on the closed-cohort recruitment strategy, the most frequently used design but also the most exposed to the risk of attrition. The aim of the second part was to assess how an open-cohort design could have been considered as a relevant alternative to a closed-cohort design. The last part of this work was to assess through a Monte Carlo simulation study how bias can be reduced when estimating an intervention effect using an open-cohort design as compared to a closed cohort, in the context of cluster randomized trial in nursing home with not at random missing data.
Most of the interventions assessed in nursing homes are at cluster level, making the open-cohort a well-adapted design. Individual attrition is no longer an issue and it provides low biased estimates of the intervention effect. Open-cohort must be considered more often when cluster randomized trials are planned in nursing homes.
Discover older theses
Expression the cluster effect for binary outcomes
In cluster randomized trials, it is recommended to report a measure of intracluster correlation, such as the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), for each primary outcome.
Providing intracluster correlation estimates, which we can also call clustering estimates, may help in sample size calculation of future cluster randomized trials but also in interpreting the results of a trial. For instance, a lower intracluster correlation in the intervention arm as compared to the control one may reveal a better standardization in practices among clusters of the intervention arm, leading to a lower between-cluster heterogeneity in outcomes. Yet, when the outcome is binary, the ICC is known to be associated with the prevalence of the outcome. This may raise issues when using ICC estimates to plan a new study, because expected outcome prevalences may di er from those observed in the study from which the ICC estimates were derived. This association also challenges the interpretation of the ICC because ICC values no longer just depend on clustering level. The aim of this PhD thesis was to study several intracluster correlation measures to identify whether they depend on the outcome prevalence as the ICC does or not. We first focused on the R coefficient, a coefficient initially proposed by Rosner for ophthalmologic data and later extended by Crespi et al. who asserted that the R coefficient may be less influenced by the outcome prevalence than is the ICC. We showed by a simulation study that this assertion is false and that the R coefficient is probably even worse than the ICC as an intracluster correlation measure. We further studied other measures such as the variance partition coefficient, the median odds ratio or the tetrachoric correlation coefficient. We also proposed to consider the relative deviation of an ICC estimate to its theoretical maximum possible value. All these measures were studied in an extensive simulation study, whose conclusion was that all of them depend in some way on the outcome prevalence. Although some measures may be preferred in some situations, none outperforms the others in every situation, and none can be considered independent from the outcome prevalence. Assessing intracluster correlation independently from the outcome prevalence remains an open eld of research.
Which place for shared decision making in the context of kidney transplantation? A mixed-methods research exploring patient experience.
Although kidney transplantation provides a significant benefit over dialysis, question regarding the eligibility for transplantation, the impact of replacement treatment on their lives, make the mode of renal replacement therapy a difficult decision. Therefore, Health Authority suggests shared decision-making to help patients make timely treatment modality decision. Little is known about how patient perceive their participation in the shared decision-making process. This research aims to explore the experience of patients and the factors that influence them indecision-making situations, as well as to evaluate the impact of this experience on their future. This research is based on a mixed methods research (QUANTI > quali).
It combines an interpretive phenomenological analysis and an observational study design to measure decisional conflict perceived by patients on the waiting list and to explore the factors that influence decision regret, quality of life and adherence among transplant recipients. This study reports that the experience of waiting list was identified as a necessary step in their pathway. They experienced as an implicit decision that shapes patients' attitudes towards other decisions and influences their ability to cope with the uncertainty of living with chronic kidney disease. The challenge of considering all stages of shared medical decision-making is major in the context of kidney transplantation to support patient participation decision.
Assessing the evolution of patient experience before and after kidney transplantation : exploring measurement invariance
End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) requires renal replacement therapies: dialysis or kidney transplantation.
Today, it is well-known that ESRD treatments impact the quality of life (QoL) of patients. Patients may perceive and interpret questionnaires differently over time: this phenomenon is called response shift (RS). Thus, observed changes in QoL may reflect not only a real change in QoL, but also a different perception of the questionnaires by patients over time (RS). The questionnaire’ perception and RS may also differ between patients who have experienced dialysis or not (preemptive).
The first objective of this dissertation was to evaluate and compare changes in QoL for preemptive and dialysis patients on the waiting list for kidney transplantation. The second objective was detecting and taking into account RS (before and after kidney transplantation) and measurement non-invariance between groups (dialysis and preemptive patients). To meet these objectives, several works have been realized. Thus, we have identified that QoL of dialyzed patients was generally lower than that of preemptive patients during the waiting list period.
Plus, RS has been detected, and we have observed that QoL level of patients adjusted on RS, tended to increase after kidney transplantation. Adaptation of specific therapeutic education programs for patients who have experienced dialysis or not would improve QoL of patients.