arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.19051

Optimal Sample Size Calculation in Cost-Effectiveness Longitudinal Cluster Randomized Trials

Hao Wang·Jingxia Liu·Drew B. Cameron·Jiaqi Tong·Donna Spiegelman·Daniella Meeker·Fan Li
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Longitudinal cluster randomized trials (L-CRTs) are increasingly used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions across multiple assessment periods, yet design methods for powering these trials remain underdeveloped. Existing methods for cost-effectiveness analyses in cluster settings are limited to simple parallel-arm cluster randomized trials with a single follow-up assessment period. These methods cannot accommodate the complex correlation structures in L-CRTs conducted over multiple periods, which require differentiation between within-period and between-period correlations for both clinical and cost outcomes, as well as between-outcome correlations. Moreover, while substantial methodological advances have been made for the design of L-CRTs with univariate outcomes, none specifically address cost-effectiveness objectives where clinical and cost outcomes must be jointly modeled. We provide a design-stage framework for powering cost-effectiveness L-CRTs across three design variants: parallel-arm, crossover, and stepped wedge designs. We derive closed-form variance expressions for the generalized least squares estimator of the average incremental net monetary benefit under a bivariate linear mixed model. We propose a standardized ceiling ratio that adjusts willingness-to-pay for relative outcome variability to inform optimal design. We then develop local optimal designs that maximize statistical power under known correlation parameters and MaxiMin designs that ensure robust performance across parameter uncertainty for all three design variants. Through a real stepped wedge trial data example, we demonstrate the sample size calculation for testing intervention cost-effectiveness under local optimal and MaxiMin designs.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hao Wang, Jingxia Liu, Drew B. Cameron, Jiaqi Tong, Donna Spiegelman, Daniella Meeker, Fan Li. 2026-03-19. Optimal Sample Size Calculation in Cost-Effectiveness Longitudinal Cluster Randomized Trials. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.19051

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗