Cargando…
A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection
BACKGROUND: When conducting a randomised controlled trial, there exist many different methods to allocate participants, and a vast array of evidence-based opinions on which methods are the most effective at doing this, leading to differing use of these methods. There is also evidence that study char...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9727841/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36476324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01786-4 |
_version_ | 1784845112025546752 |
---|---|
author | Bruce, Cydney L. Juszczak, Edmund Ogollah, Reuben Partlett, Christopher Montgomery, Alan |
author_facet | Bruce, Cydney L. Juszczak, Edmund Ogollah, Reuben Partlett, Christopher Montgomery, Alan |
author_sort | Bruce, Cydney L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: When conducting a randomised controlled trial, there exist many different methods to allocate participants, and a vast array of evidence-based opinions on which methods are the most effective at doing this, leading to differing use of these methods. There is also evidence that study characteristics affect the performance of these methods, but it is unknown whether the study design affects researchers’ decision when choosing a method. METHODS: We conducted a review of papers published in five journals in 2019 to assess which randomisation methods are most commonly being used, as well as identifying which aspects of study design, if any, are associated with the choice of randomisation method. Randomisation methodology use was compared with a similar review conducted in 2014. RESULTS: The most used randomisation method in this review is block stratification used in 162/330 trials. A combination of simple, randomisation, block randomisation, stratification and minimisation make up 318/330 trials, with only a small number of more novel methods being used, although this number has increased marginally since 2014. More complex methods such as stratification and minimisation seem to be used in larger multicentre studies. CONCLUSIONS: Within this review, most methods used can be classified using a combination of simple, block stratification and minimisation, suggesting that there is not much if any increase in the uptake of newer more novel methods. There seems to be a noticeable polarisation of method use, with an increase in the use of simple methods, but an increase in the complexity of more complex methods, with greater numbers of variables included in the analysis, and a greater number of strata. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01786-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9727841 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97278412022-12-08 A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection Bruce, Cydney L. Juszczak, Edmund Ogollah, Reuben Partlett, Christopher Montgomery, Alan BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: When conducting a randomised controlled trial, there exist many different methods to allocate participants, and a vast array of evidence-based opinions on which methods are the most effective at doing this, leading to differing use of these methods. There is also evidence that study characteristics affect the performance of these methods, but it is unknown whether the study design affects researchers’ decision when choosing a method. METHODS: We conducted a review of papers published in five journals in 2019 to assess which randomisation methods are most commonly being used, as well as identifying which aspects of study design, if any, are associated with the choice of randomisation method. Randomisation methodology use was compared with a similar review conducted in 2014. RESULTS: The most used randomisation method in this review is block stratification used in 162/330 trials. A combination of simple, randomisation, block randomisation, stratification and minimisation make up 318/330 trials, with only a small number of more novel methods being used, although this number has increased marginally since 2014. More complex methods such as stratification and minimisation seem to be used in larger multicentre studies. CONCLUSIONS: Within this review, most methods used can be classified using a combination of simple, block stratification and minimisation, suggesting that there is not much if any increase in the uptake of newer more novel methods. There seems to be a noticeable polarisation of method use, with an increase in the use of simple methods, but an increase in the complexity of more complex methods, with greater numbers of variables included in the analysis, and a greater number of strata. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01786-4. BioMed Central 2022-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9727841/ /pubmed/36476324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01786-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Bruce, Cydney L. Juszczak, Edmund Ogollah, Reuben Partlett, Christopher Montgomery, Alan A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title | A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title_full | A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title_fullStr | A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title_short | A systematic review of randomisation method use in RCTs and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
title_sort | systematic review of randomisation method use in rcts and association of trial design characteristics with method selection |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9727841/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36476324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01786-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT brucecydneyl asystematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT juszczakedmund asystematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT ogollahreuben asystematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT partlettchristopher asystematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT montgomeryalan asystematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT brucecydneyl systematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT juszczakedmund systematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT ogollahreuben systematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT partlettchristopher systematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection AT montgomeryalan systematicreviewofrandomisationmethoduseinrctsandassociationoftrialdesigncharacteristicswithmethodselection |