Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Assessing performance of a randomized versus a non-randomized study design.

Maartje Raaijmakers1, Hendrik Koffijberg, Jocelyne Posthumus

  • 1Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.A.J.Raaijmakers@umcutrecht.nl

Contemporary Clinical Trials
|August 21, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Modelling alcohol consumption patterns to enable policy impact assessment.

PloS one·2025
Same author

Comparing the Influence of Heterogeneity on Model Outcomes in Individual-Level and Cohort Simulations: An Exploratory Simulation Study.

PharmacoEconomics·2025
Same author

Model-based cost-effectiveness studies in nuclear medicine: an unavoidable fact of life.

European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging·2025
Same author

Making a difference: describing and evaluating the impact of the Dutch CardioVascular Alliance.

Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation·2025
Same author

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation versus kissing stents and open surgical repair for the treatment of aorto-iliac occlusive disease.

The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care·2025
Same author

Erratum to 'Model-Based Cost-Utility Analysis of Combined Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Cardiovascular Disease' [JTO Clinical and Research Reports Volume 6 Issue 5 (2025) 100813].

JTO clinical and research reports·2025

Matching predefined groups for parent management training studies can be a viable alternative to randomization when trials are not feasible. This method offers acceptable results if group differences are minimal, enhancing program-effectiveness evaluations.

Area of Science:

  • Program evaluation
  • Behavioral science research

Background:

  • Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are optimal for program evaluation but often infeasible.
  • Non-randomized studies may use matched groups to approximate RCT quality.
  • Parent management training effectiveness studies face challenges with randomization.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the quality of matching predefined groups versus randomized groups in program evaluation.
  • To assess the feasibility of matching as an alternative to randomization.

Main Methods:

  • Simulated hypothetical intervention and control groups.
  • Used Mahalanobis metric for assessing distance between families.
  • Employed pairwise matching and evaluated global distance for covariate balance.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The expected probability of better balance in predefined groups versus randomized groups was 0.34.
  • This indicates that randomized groups typically offer better covariate balance.

Conclusions:

  • Matching predefined groups can be acceptable in program evaluation when randomization is not feasible.
  • Acceptability depends on small differences in group means.
  • Further research comparing similar analyses across studies is needed for definitive judgment.