Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The use of unequal randomisation in clinical trials--An update.
Peckham, Emily; Brabyn, Sally; Cook, Liz; Devlin, Thomas; Dumville, Jo; Torgerson, David J.
Afiliação
  • Peckham E; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom. Electronic address: emily.peckham@york.ac.uk.
  • Brabyn S; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
  • Cook L; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
  • Devlin T; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
  • Dumville J; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
  • Torgerson DJ; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 45(Pt A): 113-22, 2015 Nov.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26027788
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To update a 2005 review of the reasons researchers have given for the use of unequal randomisation in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). MAIN

MEASURES:

Intervention being tested; type of study; number of participants; randomisation ratio; sample size calculation and reason given for using unequal randomisation.

METHODS:

Review of trials using unequal randomisation. DATABASES AND SOURCES Cochrane library, Medline and CINAHL.

RESULTS:

A total of 86 trials were identified. Of these 82 trials (95%) recruited patients in favour of the experimental group. Various reasons for the use of unequal randomisation were given including gaining treatment experience; identification of adverse events; ethical; logistic and enhancing recruitment. No trial reported explicitly used it for cost-effectiveness. Most of the papers (i.e. 47, 55%) did not state why they had used unequal randomisation and only 38 trials (44%) appeared to have taken the unequal randomisation into account in their sample size calculation.

CONCLUSION:

Most studies did not mention the rationale for unequal allocation, and a significant proportion did not appear to account for it in the sample size calculations. Unlike the previous review economic considerations were not stated as a rationale for its use. A number of trials used it to enhance recruitment, although this has not been tested.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Temas: ECOS / Aspectos_gerais Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Projetos de Pesquisa / Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Ethics Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Contemp Clin Trials Assunto da revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Temas: ECOS / Aspectos_gerais Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Projetos de Pesquisa / Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Ethics Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Contemp Clin Trials Assunto da revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article