Seven myths of randomisation in clinical trials
Seven myths of randomisation in clinical trials
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/sim.5713
复制
发表时间：
2013-04-30
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Senn, Stephen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Senn, Stephen
我认为对于临床试验中随机化的性质、目的和特性可能会遇到七个误解。有些涉及患者临床研究的实际情况。其他则与平衡的价值和目的有关。还有一些问题与对条件作用在有效统计推断中的作用的混淆有关。我考虑一个涉及两个骰子的简单机会游戏来说明有关推理的一些要点，然后依次考虑七个误解。我的结论是，虽然人们不应该迷恋随机化，但在临床试验中提出随机化的替代方案时，如果要避免低估随机化可以提供的优势，就应该非常小心地准确说明所考虑的替代方案的确切性质。版权所有 (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
I consider seven misunderstandings that may be encountered about the nature, purpose and properties of randomisation in clinical trials. Some concern the practical realities of clinical research on patients. Others are to do with the value and purpose of balance. Still others are to do with a confusion about the role of conditioning in valid statistical inference. I consider a simple game of chance involving two dice to illustrate some points about inference and then consider the seven misunderstandings in turn. I conclude that although one should not make a fetish of randomisation, when proposing alternatives to randomisation in clinical trials, one should be very careful to be precise about the exact nature of the alternative being considered if one is to avoid the danger of underestimating the advantages that randomisation can offer. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.