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 Concept Videos

Randomized Experiments01:13

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...
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs01:20

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...
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
Group Design02:01

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...
Blinding01:11

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.
Crossover Experiments01:16

Crossover Experiments

Crossover experiments, also called the repeated-measurements design, is a study design in which all experimental units are exposed to all treatments in different periods. Crossover experiments are generally used in psychology, the pharmaceutical industry, agriculture, and medicine.
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Selecting a randomization method for a multi-center clinical trial with stochastic recruitment considerations.

BMC medical research methodology·2024
Same author

Sphingolipid Metabolism in Tumor Cells.

Biochemistry. Biokhimiia·2023
Same author

Treatment Response With Esketamine Nasal Spray Plus an Oral Antidepressant in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression Without Evidence of Early Response: A Pooled Post Hoc Analysis of the TRANSFORM Studies.

The Journal of clinical psychiatry·2021
Same author

Findings of Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarker Outcomes of Atabecestat in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease: A Truncated Randomized Phase 2b/3 Clinical Trial.

JAMA neurology·2021
Same author

Approaches to expanding the two-arm biased coin randomization to unequal allocation while preserving the unconditional allocation ratio.

Statistics in medicine·2017
Same author

Comments on 'Validity and power considerations on hypothesis testing under minimization': by Z. Xu, M. Proschan, and S. Lee, Statistics in Medicine 2016.

Statistics in medicine·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Barnes Maze Testing Strategies with Small and Large Rodent Models
12:59

Barnes Maze Testing Strategies with Small and Large Rodent Models

Published on: February 26, 2014

Brick tunnel randomization for unequal allocation to two or more treatment groups.

Olga M Kuznetsova1, Yevgen Tymofyeyev

  • 1Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., 126 East Lincoln Avenue, Rahway, NJ 07065-0900, USA. olga_kuznetsova@merck.com

Statistics in Medicine
|March 25, 2011
PubMed
Summary

Brick tunnel (BT) randomization offers a novel solution for unequal treatment group allocation in clinical trials. This method ensures consistent allocation ratios, overcoming limitations of traditional permuted block randomization, especially in complex study designs.

More Related Videos

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism
08:03

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism

Published on: July 5, 2014

Experimental Protocol for Manipulating Plant-induced Soil Heterogeneity
08:16

Experimental Protocol for Manipulating Plant-induced Soil Heterogeneity

Published on: March 13, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Barnes Maze Testing Strategies with Small and Large Rodent Models
12:59

Barnes Maze Testing Strategies with Small and Large Rodent Models

Published on: February 26, 2014

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism
08:03

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism

Published on: July 5, 2014

Experimental Protocol for Manipulating Plant-induced Soil Heterogeneity
08:16

Experimental Protocol for Manipulating Plant-induced Soil Heterogeneity

Published on: March 13, 2014

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Trial Design
  • Biostatistics
  • Randomization Methods

Background:

  • Unequal allocation in studies with multiple treatment groups often necessitates large block sizes for permuted block randomization.
  • This poses challenges in small, multi-center, or adaptive dose-finding studies.
  • Existing methods may struggle to maintain precise allocation ratios in complex trial designs.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To introduce and describe Brick tunnel (BT) randomization, a novel procedure for unequal allocation.
  • To generalize existing maximal procedures to K≥2 treatment groups and any allocation ratio.
  • To ensure consistent unconditional allocation ratios at each randomization step.

Main Methods:

  • Developed Brick tunnel (BT) randomization, generalizing Berger, Ivanova, and Knoll's maximal procedure.
  • The method confines the allocation path within a 'brick tunnel' in k-dimensional space, guided by the allocation ray.
  • Transition probabilities are defined to maintain the target unconditional allocation ratio throughout the randomization process.

Main Results:

  • BT randomization successfully generalizes unequal allocation procedures for K≥2 groups.
  • The method ensures that the unconditional allocation ratio remains constant at every randomization step.
  • This property addresses limitations of other unequal allocation procedures.

Conclusions:

  • Brick tunnel (BT) randomization provides a robust method for achieving precise unequal allocation in clinical trials.
  • It is particularly advantageous for studies with complex designs or stringent allocation ratio requirements.
  • BT randomization ensures statistical validity and efficiency in multi-group unequal allocation scenarios.