Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Randomized Experiments

Randomized Experiments

The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...

Blinding

Blinding

Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...

Blind Procedures

Blind Procedures

Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which child was...

Group Design

Group Design

The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to...

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to subjects...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Mirabegron and Intradetrusor Onabotulinumtoxina for Overactive Bladder in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Neurourology and urodynamics·2026

Same author

Polygenic risk score with KLK3 SNP-SNP interaction pairs for predicting prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Communications medicine·2026

Same author

Germline polygenic score for prostate cancer aggressiveness.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026

Same author

Long-term outcomes of cribriform-positive and cribriform-negative prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in the ProtecT trial.

BJU international·2026

Same author

Changes in perceived cognitive functioning following a codesigned online group cognitive rehabilitation for prostate cancer survivors on androgen deprivation therapy: Series of single-case experimental designs.

Neuropsychological rehabilitation·2026

Same author

Genomic risk model to implement precision prostate cancer screening in clinical care: the ProGRESS study.

Nature cancer·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 3, 2026

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

Published on: September 20, 2019

Development of a complex intervention improved randomization and informed consent in a randomized controlled trial.

Jenny L Donovan¹, J Athene Lane, Tim J Peters

¹Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR, UK. jenny.donovan@bristol.ac.uk

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

|July 16, 2008

Summary

A complex intervention significantly boosted patient recruitment and informed consent in a challenging prostate cancer trial. This strategy can improve randomization rates in difficult clinical trials.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 3, 2026

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition

Published on: September 20, 2019

Area of Science:

Clinical trial methodology
Health services research
Cancer research

Background:

Multicenter randomized trials are crucial for evaluating healthcare interventions but face significant recruitment challenges.
Previous systematic reviews have not identified effective strategies to enhance participant recruitment.
Developing methods to improve randomization and informed consent is essential for trial success.

Purpose of the Study:

To develop and evaluate a complex intervention designed to increase randomization and informed consent rates.
To address the persistent difficulties in recruiting participants for large-scale clinical trials.

Main Methods:

The intervention was developed using qualitative research, including content, thematic, and conversation analysis.
The ProtecT trial, comparing treatments for localized prostate cancer, served as the evaluation platform.
Rates of randomization and immediate acceptance of treatment allocation were monitored over time.

Main Results:

The intervention included center reviews, training, standardized documents, and personalized feedback.
Over 65% of eligible participants consented to randomization in the trial.
Informed consent improved, with immediate acceptance of allocation rising from 65% to 81% between 2001 and 2005.

Conclusions:

The developed complex intervention successfully achieved high randomization and informed consent rates in a challenging trial.
Applicable components of this intervention can be used in other trials to maximize recruitment and informed consent.
This approach may enable the initiation of trials previously deemed too difficult to conduct.