JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Comparing the Randomization Methods Considering the Covariates in a Clinical Trial
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Comparing the Randomization Methods Considering the Covariates in a Clinical Trial
Yu, A-Mi; Lee, Jae-Won;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
In clinical trials, patients should be randomly allocated to treatment and control groups that consider the balance of their prognostic factors(covariates). There are many randomization methods and stratification is popular in Korea. In stratification, patients are divided into strata based on covariates and then the patients are randomly assigned to the arms of each strata. If the number of covariates increases then the number of strata increases rapidly and the results may not be reliable when the patients are inadequate in each strata. To complement this problem Pocock and Simon (1975) suggested a new randomization method that called for minimization focusing on the balance of covariates. In this study, we compare the advantages and disadvantages, the imbalance of covariates, the power of minimization, and other randomization methods by simulation.
 Keywords
Randomization;minimization;prognostic factor;clinical trial;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
이재원, 박미라, 유한나 (2005). <생명과학연구를 위한 통계적 방법>, 자유아카데미, 서울.

2.
Gronbladh, A. and Guilbaud, O. (2004). The method of minimization proposed by Pocock and Simon-Properties with regards to balance and inferential validity, Uppsala University

3.
Kernan, W. N., Viscoli, C. M., Makuch, R. W., Brass, L. M. and Horwitz, R. I. (1999). Stratified randomization for clinical trials, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 52, 19–26.

4.
Kundt, G. (2009). Comparative evaluation of balancing properties of stratified randomization procedures, Methods of Information in Medicine, 48, 129–134.

5.
McEntegart, D. J. (2003). The pursuit of balance using stratified and dynamic randomization techniques: an overview, Drug Information Journal, 37, 293–308.

6.
Pocock, S. J. and Simon, R. (1975). Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial, Biometrics, 31, 103–115.

7.
Scott, N. W., McPherson, G. C., Ramsay, C. R. and Campbell, M. K. (2002). The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials: a review, Controlled Clinical Trials, 23, 662–674.

8.
Simon, R. (1979). Restricted randomization designs in clinical trials, Biometrics, 35, 503–512.

9.
Therneau, T. M. (1993). How many stratification factors is "too many" to use in a randomization plan?, Control Clinical Trial, 14, 98–108.

10.
Tu, D., Shalay, K. and Pater, J. (2000). Adjustment of treatment effect for covariates in clinical trials: Statistical and regulatory issues, Drug Information Journal, 34, 511–523.

11.
Wade, A., Pan, H., Eaton, S., Pierro, A. and Ong, E. (2006). An investigation of minimisation criteria, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6, 1471–2288.

12.
Weir, C. J. and Lees, K. R. (2003). Comparison of stratification and adaptive methods for treatment allocation in an acute stroke clinical trial, Statistics in Medicine, 22, 705–726.