Analysis of Stepped-Wedge Randomised Cluster Trial using a generalized pairwise comparison approach : a simulation study

Stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials (SW-CRTs) increasingly evaluate complex interventions, yet methodological guidance for analysing composite endpoints using generalized pairwise comparisons (GPC)remains limited. This work investigates the performance of several GPC-based estimators in the presence of clustering, temporal trends, and varying correlation structures typical of SW-CRTs. We conducted an extensive simulation study covering a range of intraclass correlations (ICC), cluster autocorrelation coefficients (CAC), time effects, and treatment effect sizes. Eight analytical approaches were compared, including unadjusted estimators, cluster-stratified win odds, mixed-effects models applied to cluster-period win odds, and probabilistic index models (PIMs). Type I error control was strongly compromised for methods ignoring time or clustering, whereas only two approaches consistently maintained nominal error rates: a hierarchical mixed-effects model with sequence and cluster-level random slopes (b4) and a cluster-restricted PIM (c2). These two methods were further evaluated in terms of statistical power, where c2 generally showed higher efficiency, particularly under strong clustering, low CAC, or the presence of temporal trends, while both converged to similar performance for large treatment effects. Overall, our findings identify b4 and c2 as the most reliable GPC-based strategies for SW-CRT analysis and provide practical guidance for their application, including for ongoing trials such as ETHER.

• Publication year

  2026

• Venue

  Unknown venue

• Publication date

  2026-03-02

• Fields of study

  Medicine, Mathematics

• Identifiers
  arXiv 2603.02003
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• The Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the “Patient Activation Measure”

  2025cited by this paper
• Regularized win ratio regression for variable selection and risk prediction, with an application to a cardiovascular trial

  2025cited by this paper
• Why and when should we cluster randomize?

  2024cited by this paper
• How should a cluster randomized trial be analyzed?

  2024cited by this paper
• Mobile Health-Technology-Integrated Care for Atrial Fibrillation: A Win Ratio Analysis from the mAFA-II Randomized Clinical Trial

  2023cited by this paper
• The win odds: statistical inference and regression

  2022cited by this paper
• The batched stepped wedge design: A design robust to delays in cluster recruitment

  2022cited by this paper
• Generalised pairwise comparisons for trend: An extension to the win ratio and win odds for dose-response and prognostic variable analysis with arbitrary statements of outcome preference

  2022cited by this paper
• Mixed-effects models for the design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials: An overview

  2020cited by this paper
• Reporting of stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration

  2018cited by this paper
• On the win-ratio statistic in clinical trials with multiple types of event

  2016cited by this paper
• Choosing appropriate analysis methods for cluster randomised cross‐over trials with a binary outcome

  2016cited by this paper
• Sample size calculation for stepped wedge and other longitudinal cluster randomised trials

  2016cited by this paper
• The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting

  2015cited by this paper
• Probabilistic index models

  2012cited by this paper
• The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities

  2011cited by this paper
• Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two‐sample problem

  2010influential reference
• Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.

  2007cited by this paper
• Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers.

  2004cited by this paper
• Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood.

  1997cited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.