Regular Article
Methodological issues in randomized controlled trials

https://doi.org/10.1053/siny.1999.0004Get rights and content

Abstract

There is increasing emphasis on the need to practise evidence-based medicine and the strongest evidence comes from well designed and well-conducted randomized controlled trials. Every component is important for the success of a clinical trial; if the design or sample size is inappropriate, then the results of the study will be unreliable, however well the study is conducted. Conversely a well-designed study may founder because of poor outcome measurement or unacceptably high subject loss. The advantages of a well-designed trial apply equally to studies with short term outcomes and to those requiring long-term follow up. This paper therefore focuses on general methodological issues with a discussion, where appropriate, of the special considerations associated with long-term follow-up. This emphasis is motivated by the belief that a trial with methodological weaknesses is both a waste of resources and unethical. Anyone planning to undertake a randomized controlled trial should consult a more comprehensive text [1–4]. Here, some selected issues are highlighted with the choice of topics reflecting the experience and interests of the authors.

References (22)

  • CB Begg

    On inferences from Wei's biased coin design for clinical trials (with discussion)

    Biometrika

    (1990)
  • Cited by (9)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    f1

    Correspondence: Ruth Morley. E-mail:[email protected]. edu.au

    View full text