The "best balance" allocation led to optimal balance in cluster-controlled trials

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 132-137

  De Hoop, Esther ^a   Teerenstra, Steven ^a   Van Gaal, Betsie G I ^a   Moerbeek, Mirjam ^b   Borm, George F ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cluster randomized trial; Imbalance; Matching; Minimization; Prognostic factors; Randomization; Stratification

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BEST BALANCE ALLOCATION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CLUSTER CONTROLLED TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RANDOMIZATION; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; PROGNOSIS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84855344706     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Pocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 1975;31:103-15.
2. International conference on harmonisation. Guidance on statistical principals for clinical trials. Fed Regist. International Conference on Harmonisation; E9 Document. 1998;63:49583-98.
3. Scott NW, McPherson GC, Ramsay CR, Campbell MK. The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials. A review. Control Clin Trials 2002;23:662-74. (Pubitemid 36005476)
4. McEntegart DJ. The pursuit of balance using stratified and dynamic randomization techniques: an overview. Drug Inf J 2003;37:293-308. (Pubitemid 37309319)
5. Begg CB, Iglewicz B. Treatment allocation procedure for sequential clinical-trials. Biometrics 1980;36:81-90.
6. Therneau TM. How many stratification factors are too many to use in a randomization plan. Control Clin Trials 1993;14:98-108. (Pubitemid 23102299)
7. Perry M, Faes M, Reelick MF, Olde Rikkert MG, Borm GF. Study-wise minimization: a treatment allocation method that improves balance among treatment groups and makes allocation unpredictable. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:1118-22.
8. Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold; 2000.
9. Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004;328:702-8. (Pubitemid 38393415)
10. D'Agostino RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 1998;17:2265-81.
11. Taves DR. Minimization - new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1974;15:443-53.
12. Borm GF, Hoogendoorn EH, den Heijer M, Zielhuis GA. Sequential balancing: a simple method for treatment allocation in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2005;26:637-45. (Pubitemid 41719096)
13. HoehlerFK. Balancing allocation of subjects in biomedical-research - a minimization strategy based on ranks. Comput Biomed Res 1987;20:209-13.
14. Stigsby B, Taves DR. Rank-minimization for balanced assignment of subjects in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2010;31:147-50.
15. van Gaal BG, Schoonhoven L, Hulscher ME, Mintjes JA, Borm GF, Koopmans RT, et al. The design of the SAFE or SORRY? study: a cluster randomised trial on the development and testing of an evidence based inpatient safety program for the prevention of adverse events. BMC Health Serv Res 2009;9:58.