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

Ethics in Research

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.

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,...

Bias

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Do they work, and are they worth it? Proposing a framework of evidence synthesis for guiding the evidence-based use of add-ons in <i>in vitro</i> fertilisation.

Human fertility (Cambridge, England)·2026

Same author

Reply: Reconsidering the interpretation of sperm DNA fragmentation testing in ART decision-making.

Human reproduction open·2026

Same author

Does intracytoplasmic sperm injection outperform conventional in vitro fertilization in couples without severe male factor infertility? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Human reproduction (Oxford, England)·2026

Same author

Re-evaluating endometrial injury for IVF: was a promising approach abandoned prematurely? A critical review.

Reproductive biomedicine online·2026

Same author

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) pretreatment duration and letrozole supplementation for optimizing live birth rates in women with adenomyosis undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer (GOLD-FET): study protocol for a multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial in China.

Trials·2026

Same author

Prediction of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury in Nulliparous Women: Model Development and Temporal Validation.

BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 25, 2025

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

Assessing Research Misconduct in Randomized Controlled Trials.

Wentao Li¹, Esmée M Bordewijk, Ben W Mol

¹Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Australia; the Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and the Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.

Obstetrics and Gynecology

|August 5, 2021

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Ensuring data integrity in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is crucial for patient safety and evidence-based medicine. This study highlights the need for better detection and prevention of research misconduct in clinical trials.

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Author Spotlight: Methodologies and Advancements of Chronic Pain Management Research

Author Spotlight: Methodologies and Advancements of Chronic Pain Management Research

Published on: January 5, 2024

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 25, 2025

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Author Spotlight: Methodologies and Advancements of Chronic Pain Management Research

Author Spotlight: Methodologies and Advancements of Chronic Pain Management Research

Published on: January 5, 2024

Area of Science:

Medical Research
Clinical Trials
Evidence-Based Medicine

Background:

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are fundamental to evidence-based medicine, but compromised data integrity poses risks to patient safety.
A significant number of retractions in obstetrics and gynecology highlight issues with data integrity, yet many problematic RCTs remain undetected due to reluctance to address research misconduct.
The current systems for monitoring published articles and handling research misconduct are inadequate.

Purpose of the Study:

To emphasize the necessity of assessing research misconduct in RCTs.
To summarize existing methods for detecting misconduct.
To propose solutions for improving data integrity and misconduct investigation mechanisms.

Main Methods:

Reviewing methods for assessing data integrity in RCTs, with and without individual participant data.
Analyzing strategies for detecting research misconduct, including assessing publication patterns of authors or author groups for duplication and consistent misconduct.
Discussing the limitations of current feedback and misconduct handling systems.

Main Results:

Existing methods can assess data integrity in RCTs.
Investigating patterns across multiple publications can reveal ongoing misconduct.
Current mechanisms for handling misconduct are insufficient and need improvement.

Conclusions:

There is a critical need for enhanced mechanisms to investigate data manipulation in RCTs.
The misconduct investigation process must prioritize patient and reader interests over author or institutional interests.
Establishing robust systems to prevent compromised trials from influencing evidence synthesis and medical practice is essential.