Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10545/622278
Title:
The use of unequal randomisation in clinical trials — An update.
Authors:
Peckham, Emily; Brabyn, Sally; Cook, Liz; Devlin, Thomas; Dumville, Jo; Torgerson, David J.
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.
Affiliation:
University of York; University of Manchester
Citation:
Peckham, E. et al (2015) 'The use of unequal randomisation in clinical trials — An update', Contemporary Clinical Trials, 45:113 .
Publisher:
Elsevier
Journal:
Contemporary Clinical Trials
Issue Date:
Nov-2015
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10545/622278
DOI:
10.1016/j.cct.2015.05.017
Additional Links:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155171441530015X
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
15517144
Sponsors:
N/A
Appears in Collections:
Department of Humanities

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorPeckham, Emilyen
dc.contributor.authorBrabyn, Sallyen
dc.contributor.authorCook, Lizen
dc.contributor.authorDevlin, Thomasen
dc.contributor.authorDumville, Joen
dc.contributor.authorTorgerson, David J.en
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-13T09:21:59Z-
dc.date.available2018-03-13T09:21:59Z-
dc.date.issued2015-11-
dc.identifier.citationPeckham, E. et al (2015) 'The use of unequal randomisation in clinical trials — An update', Contemporary Clinical Trials, 45:113 .en
dc.identifier.issn15517144-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cct.2015.05.017-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10545/622278-
dc.description.abstractObjective 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.en
dc.description.sponsorshipN/Aen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.relation.urlhttp://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155171441530015Xen
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to Contemporary Clinical Trialsen
dc.subjectUnequal randomisationen
dc.subjectRandomised controlled trialsen
dc.titleThe use of unequal randomisation in clinical trials — An update.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Yorken
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Manchesteren
dc.identifier.journalContemporary Clinical Trialsen
All Items in UDORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.