What does this research mean for the field?

Cluster randomized trials in critical care settings continue to exhibit significant ethical and methodological shortcomings, including inadequate justification for cluster randomization, underreporting of consent procedures, and failure to apply small sample corrections. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.SYNTHESIS. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate and describe the ethical reporting practices and methodological designs of cluster randomized trials conducted in critical care settings.

September 8, 2026Critical Care Medicine

Ethical and Methodological Features of Cluster Randomized Trials in Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Review

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

EWEric WalserWestern University CGCory E. GoldsteinUniversity of Ottawa JSJulia F. ShawUniversity of Ottawa

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Systematic review reveals persistent ethical and methodological gaps in critical care cluster randomized trials, indicating a need for standardized reporting and ethical frameworks.

Key Points

To evaluate and describe the ethical reporting practices and methodological designs of cluster randomized trials conducted in critical care settings.
Systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase for English-language primary reports of cluster randomized trials in critical care published between 2004 and 2022.
Dual independent data extraction covering trial registration, ethical review, consent models, randomization justification, and statistical methodologies across N=102 included trials.
Trial registration was reported in 78% (77/102) of trials, research ethics committee review in 99% (101/102), and justification for cluster randomization in only 46% (47/102).
Patients were identified as participants in 97% of trials (99/102) with 75% (74/99) reporting consent (49% waived), whereas healthcare providers were participants in 47% (48/102) with only 23% (11/48) reporting consent.
Sample size calculations were reported in 80% (82/102) of trials, with 82% (67/82) accounting for intracluster correlation; 76% (77/102) accounted for intracluster correlation in the primary analysis, and 13% (11/85) of trials with <40 clusters applied small-sample corrections.

Cite This Study

Walser et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9fd79b58e84d0ff5b46654 https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000007340

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Systematic review reveals persistent ethical and methodological gaps in critical care cluster randomized trials, indicating a need for standardized reporting and ethical frameworks.

Ethical and Methodological Features of Cluster Randomized Trials in Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Ethical and Methodological Features of Cluster Randomized Trials in Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider