Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Sep 23.
Published in final edited form as: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Aug 10;(8):CD000125. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000125.pub4
Methods Cluster RCT, with the community hospitals the unit of randomisation
Participants 76 physicians (family physicians & obstetricians) from 16 community hospitals Intervention:n=8 and Control: n=8
Country: Canada
Type of targeted behaviour: general management of a problem (obstetrical care)
Interventions Intervention
  1. Local Opinion Leaders + distribution of educational materials.

  2. Audit & feedback + distribution of educational material

Method of OL identification: Sociometric
Proportion of social network that nominated OL: 65%
Single OL or OL teams identified: single OL
OL disseminated information: Informal & Formal.
OL frequency of involvement: action taken at least at three distinct points in time + one: UNCLEAR
Control
Distribution of educational material
Outcomes Health professional outcomes: mean percent of women offered a trial of labour.
Patient outcomes: mean percent of women underwent a trial of labour and vaginal births
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors’ judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Pg.2202/Col 1/Para 1
“ we first randomly selected and assigned 16 eligible counties to one of the intervention or the control group. One eligible hospital was then randomly selected from each county to receive an invitation to participate in its assigned study group.”
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk It was a cluster RCT, with the community hospitals the unit of randomisation
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes
Unclear risk Not mentioned in the paper.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes
Unclear risk Not mentioned in the paper.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes mentioned in the methods section were also presented in the results
Other bias Low risk
Similar baseline outcome measures? Low risk p.2205/Cil1/Para1, p.2205/Table 1
There were no significant differences for baseline characteristics
Similar baseline characteristics? Low risk p.2205/Cil1/Para1, p.2205/Table 1
There were no significant differences for baseline characteristics
Protection against contamination? Low risk p.2202/Col1/Para1
“,the unit of randomisation and intervention was the community hospital.”