Abstract:Multiple public health and medical research studies have applied matched‐pair cluster randomization design to the evaluation of the intervention and/or prevention effects. One of the most common and severe problems faced by researchers when conducting cluster randomized trials (CRTs) is incomplete observations, which are associated with various reasons causing the individuals to discontinue participating in the trials. Although statistical methods to remedy the problems of missing data have already been proposed, there are still methodological gaps in research concerning the determination of sample size in matched‐pair CRTs with incomplete binary outcomes. One conventional method for adjusting for missing data in the sample size determination is to divide the sample size under complete data by the expected follow‐up rate. However, such crude adjustment ignores the impact of the structure and strength of correlations regarding both outcome data and missing data mechanism. This article provides a closed‐form sample size formula for matched‐pair CRTs with incomplete binary outcomes, which appropriately accounts for different missing patterns and magnitudes as well as the effects of matching and clustering on the outcome and missing data. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach treats incomplete observations as missing data in a marginal logistic regression model, which flexibly accommodates various types of intraclass correlation, missing patterns, and missing proportions. In the presence of missing data, the proposed GEE sample size method provides higher accuracy as compared with the conventional method. The performance of the proposed method is assessed by simulation studies. This article also illustrates how the proposed method can be used to design a real‐world matched‐pair CRT to examine the effect of a team‐based approach on controlling blood pressure (BP).

Estimating sample sizes for continuous, binary, and ordinal outcomes in paired comparisons: practical hints

Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical, and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons

Exact conditional and unconditional sample size for pair-matched studies with binary outcome: a practical guide

Sample Size Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Assessing Equivalence/noninferiority for Paired Binary Data

Sample size estimation for case‐crossover studies

Sample size considerations for matched‐pair cluster randomization design with incomplete observations of binary outcomes

A Comparative Review of Methods for Comparing Means Using Partially Paired Data

On sample size calculation based on odds ratio in clinical trials.

A Comparative Study of Matched Pair Designs with Two Binary Endpoints

Sample Size Estimation in the Sequential Parallel Comparison Design and the Two-way Enriched Design

Sample Size Determination for Matched-Pair Equivalence Trials Using Rate Ratio

Confidence Interval Construction for Proportion Difference in Small‐sample Paired Studies

SMART Binary: Sample Size Calculation for Comparing Adaptive Interventions in SMART studies with Longitudinal Binary Outcomes

Sample size formula for general win ratio analysis

Tests for equivalence based on odds ratio for matched-pair design

Sample Size Determination and Re‐estimation for Matched Pair Designs with Multiple Binary Endpoints

Accurate Mean Comparisons for Paired Samples with Missing Data: an Application to a Smoking‐cessation Trial

Sample size determination for establishing equivalence/noninferiority via ratio of two proportions in matched-pair design.

Estimation of sample sizes in case-control studies with multiple controls per case: dichotomous data

Bayesian Sample Size Calculations For Comparing Two Binomial Proportions

Testing the equality of response rate functions for paired binary data with multiple groups