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

Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials.

D G Altman1, C J Doré

  • 1Medical Statistics Laboratory, Imperial Cancer Research Fund, London, UK.

Lancet (London, England)
|January 20, 1990
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

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials.

The British journal of dermatology·2019
Same author

'Allocation concealment': the evolution and adoption of a methodological term.

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine·2018
Same author

[Better Reporting of Interventions: Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist and Guide].

Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))·2018
Same author

GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research.

Research involvement and engagement·2017
Same author

GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2017
Same author

Quality control of ultrasound for fetal biometry: results from the INTERGROWTH-21<sup>st</sup> Project.

Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology·2017
Same journal

Medical compartmentalisation: a patient with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome in Japan.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
Same journal

[<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-edotreotide versus everolimus for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (COMPETE): a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Research priorities for characterising Bundibugyo virus.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Rethinking treatment sequence in advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Dual mobility total hip replacement in fractures: stability promotes patient confidence.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Dual mobility versus standard cups in total hip replacement for displaced femoral neck fractures (Duality): an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled, superiority trial.

Lancet (London, England)·2026
See all related articles

Reporting of randomization methods in clinical trials is often inadequate, with many studies lacking clear randomization evidence or showing bias. Improved reporting standards are needed for reliable medical research.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Research Methodology
  • Clinical Trial Design
  • Evidence-Based Medicine

Background:

  • Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are crucial for establishing treatment efficacy.
  • Methodological rigor in RCTs, particularly randomization, is essential for unbiased results.
  • Previous assessments indicate potential deficiencies in reporting RCT methodologies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the quality of reporting for randomization methods in published randomized clinical trials.
  • To identify common deficiencies in the reporting of randomization and baseline comparisons.
  • To provide recommendations for enhancing the standards of reporting in clinical trial publications.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of 80 randomized clinical trials.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of reporting quality concerning randomization procedures.
  • Assessment of the handling and reporting of baseline characteristic comparisons between groups.

    • Main Results:

    • Inadequate reporting of randomization methodology was prevalent.
    • 30% of trials lacked clear evidence of randomization.
    • Simple randomization often resulted in similar group sizes, with a bias favoring fewer patients in the experimental group.
    • 41% of trials inadequately handled comparisons of baseline characteristics.

    Conclusions:

    • Significant improvements are needed in the reporting of randomization techniques in clinical trials.
    • Clearer guidelines and adherence are necessary to ensure the integrity of randomized clinical trial reporting.
    • Enhanced methodological reporting will strengthen the reliability and validity of medical research findings.