Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials.

@article{Robinson2004LayCO,
  title={Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials.},
  author={Elizabeth J. Z. Robinson and Cicely Kerr and Andrew Stevens and Richard J. Lilford and David A Braunholtz and Sarah J. L. Edwards},
  journal={Social science & medicine},
  year={2004},
  volume={58 4},
  pages={811-24}
}
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) play a central role in modern medical advance, and they require participants who understand and accept the procedures involved. Published evidence suggests that RCT participants often fail to understand that treatments are allocated at random and that clinicians are in equipoise about which treatment is best. We examine background assumptions that members of the public might draw upon if invited to take part in a RCT. Four studies (N=82; 67; 67; 128), in the… CONTINUE READING