4.7 Article

The questionable use of unequal allocation in confirmatory trials

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 82, 期 1, 页码 77-79

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000438226.10353.1c

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [EOG 102824]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Randomization is the standard means for addressing known and unknown confounders within the patient population in clinical trials. Although random assignment to treatment arms on a 1:1 basis has long been the norm, many 2-armed confirmatory trials now use unequal allocation schemes where the number of patients receiving investigational interventions exceeds those in the comparator arm. In what follows, we offer 3 arguments for why investigators, institutional review boards, and data and safety monitoring boards should exercise caution when planning or reviewing 2-armed confirmatory trials involving unequal allocation ratios. We close by laying out some of the conditions where uneven allocation can be justified ethically.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据