Randomized controlled trials.

  title={Randomized controlled trials.},
  author={Harald O. Stolberg and Geoffrey R Norman and Isabelle Trop},
  journal={AJR. American journal of roentgenology},
  volume={183 6},
receding articles in this series have provided a great deal of information concerning research design and methodology, including research protocols, statistical analyses, and assessment of the clinical importance of radiologic research studies. Many methods of research design have already been presented, including descriptive studies (e.g., case reports, case series, and cross-sectional surveys), and some analytical designs (e.g., cohort and case-control studies). Case-control and cohort… 

The Choice of Controls for Providing Validity and Evidence in Clinical Research

It is shown that 48 percent of the studies published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery that were required to have a control group failed to incorporate a well-defined control group.

Fundamentals Of Randomized Controlled Trials

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is a form of study or scientific experiment in which people are allocated at random to receive one of several clinical interventions to test the safety and efficacy of any therapeutic or health care procedures.

A guide to do randomized controlled trials in the field of otolaryngology

A comprehensive review for RCT in otolaryngology discussing their importance, advantages, and drawbacks, types, steps, challenges, reporting their quality and their prevalence in the literature is given.


Various types of randomized controlled trials, their characteristics, the process of randomization, and advantages and drawbacks of randomizedcontrolled trials are reviewed with special emphasis on the latter.


In different subject areas, the application of blinding techniques and type of intervention are somewhat related to research methodology and medical ethics, and it seems that intervention type depends on subject area, and blinding technique is determined by the selected type of Intervention.

Quality of reports of randomized clinical trials in plastic surgery.

A survey of randomized clinical trials performed by plastic surgeons and published in the English language from 1966 to 2003 is presented, finding that high-quality trials and their reports should lead to better and more realistic estimates of treatment effects, more accurate Estimates of treatment efficacy, and greater acceptance of these results within the health care community.

History of controlled trials in medicine: real priorities are little-known. Report 3. Quasi-randomized and randomized trials in humans and animals

It was found that although the ideas of both designs are a thing of the past, the bulk of the tests were carried out in the 20th century, when both designs existed in parallel, and the alternate allocation was used nearly three times longer than randomization.

Randomized controlled trials

This paper addresses the basic ideas that underlie trials in different ways, and cover contemporary definitions and vernacular, some history, and idea of cumulating evidence from such trials including recent work on replication and meta-analyses.

Randomized controlled trials: Fundamental concepts

The fundamental components of a RCT are reviewed for the prospective investigator as well as for those attempting to implement evidence-based therapy and rehabilitation practice based on reports of RCTs.

Fundamentals of Randomization in Clinical Trial

A brief definition of randomization plus its concise benefits in clinical trials are presented, and the processes of an accurate randomization procedure, generation of unpredictable random allocation sequence and allocation concealment are considered.



Crossover and self-controlled designs in clinical research.

This work investigated the use of the crossover design in 13 crossover studies that appeared in the Journal during 1978 and 1979 and reported briefly on 28 additional studies of a single treatment each, in which each patient served as his or her own control before or after treatment or both.

How well is the clinical importance of study results reported? An assessment of randomized controlled trials.

Authors of RCTs published in major general medical and internal medicine journals do not consistently provide their own interpretation of the clinical importance of their results, and they often do not provide sufficient information to allow readers to make their own interpretations.

Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials.

The pattern over time in the level of statistical power and the reporting of sample size calculations in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with negative results is described and few trials discussed whether the observed differences were clinically important.

Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement

It is entirely reasonable to require higher standards for papers reporting randomised trials than those describing other types of study, since randomised controlled trials are the best way to compare the effectiveness of different interventions.

The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials

The revised CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial's conduct and to assess the validity of its results.

Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality.

Similar quality of reporting may hide important differences in methodologic quality, and well-conducted trials may be reported badly, so a clear distinction should be made between these 2 dimensions of the quality of RCTs.

Is there a role for preference assessments in research on quality of life in oncology?

A framework within which an ‘ethics of evidence’ might be developed is outlined, and it is suggested that the framework also may provide a useful model for the processes involved in the transfer of research results into clinical practice.