The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Properties of permuted-block randomization in clinical trials
Abstract
This article describes some of the important statistical properties of the commonly used permuted-block design, also known simply as blocked-randomization. Under a permutation model for statistical tests, proper analyses should employ tests that incorporate the blocking used in the randomization. These include the block-stratified Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test for binary data, the blocked analysis of variance F test, and the blocked nonparametric linear rank test. It is common, however, to ignore the blocking in the analysis. For these tests, it is shown that the size of a test obtained from an analysis incorporating the blocking (say T), versus an analysis ignoring the blocking (say TI), is related to the intrablock correlation coefficient (R) as TI = T(1-R). For blocks of common length 2m, the range of R is from -1/(2m-1) to 1. Thus, if there is a positive intrablock correlation, which is more likely than not for m greater than 1, an analysis ignoring blocking will be unduly conservative. Permutation tests are also presented for the case of stratified analyses within one or more subgroups of patients defined post hoc on the basis of a covariate. This provides a basis for the analysis when responses from some patients are assumed to be missing-at-random. An alternative strategy that requires no assumptions is to perform the analysis using only the subset of complete blocks in which no observations are missing. The Blackwell-Hodges model is used to assess the potential for selection bias induced by investigator attempts to guess which treatment is more likely to be assigned to each incoming patient. In an unmasked trial, the permuted-block design provides substantial potential for selection bias in the comparison of treatments due to the predictability of the assignments that is induced by the requirement of balance within blocks. Further, this bias is not eliminated by the use of random block sizes. We also modify the Blackwell-Hodges model to allow for selection bias only when the investigator is able to discern the next assignment with certainty. This type of bias is reduced by the use of random block sizes and is eliminated only if the possible block sizes are unknown to the investigators. Finally, the Efron model for accidental bias is used to assess the potential for bias in the estimation of treatment effects due to covariate imbalances. For the permuted-block design, the variance of this bias approaches that of complete randomization as the half-block length m----infinity.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“we randomized each of them to a single treatment by using the method of randomly permuted blocks (Matts & Lachin, 1988).Randomization was stratified into two blocks by the use of psychotropic medication”
From Efficacy of an acceptance-based group behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. (2020) · cites this paper as Matts & Lachin, 1988
In the citing paper
“A random number generator (http://www.randomization.com) was used to generate a random number for each participant and randomly allocate each enrolled participant to one of the two treatment groups, in a 1:1 ratio, following the method of randomly permuted blocks (Matts and Lachin, 1988).”
From Inflammatory markers changes following acceptance-based behavioral psychotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder patients: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as Matts and Lachin, 1988
In the citing paper
“Dr Shi randomized the 288 participants into control and intervention groups using the permuted block randomization method [21]”
From Mobile-Delivered Mindfulness Intervention on Anxiety Level Among College Athletes: Randomized Controlled Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“Generation of the random allocation sequence, using permuted block randomization [55], was conducted by the second author (JP).”
Citations
Cites
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions.
Everitt, B. S., & Fleiss, J. L. (1981) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2530193 · Cited by 9,034
Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks
Mergenthaler, M. J., & Lehmann, E. L. (1979) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1268531 · Cited by 3,353
The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments.
Hills, M., & Fleiss, J. L. (1987) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2982050 · Cited by 3,261
Fundamentals of Clinical Trials
Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., DeMets, D. L., Reboussin, D. M., & Granger, C. B. (2015) · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-18539-2 · Cited by 2,237
Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks.
Beaver, R. J., & Lehmann, E. L. (1976) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529529 · Cited by 2,067
Forcing a sequential experiment to be balanced
EFRON, B. (1971) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/58.3.403 · Cited by 873
The randomization and stratification of patients to clinical trials
Zelen, M. (1974) · Journal of Chronic Diseases · doi:10.1016/0021-9681(74)90015-0 · Cited by 614
Fundamentals of Clinical Trials
Rhoads, G. G. (1986) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1986.03380080101043 · Cited by 344
Properties of the urn randomization in clinical trials
Wei, L. J., & Lachin, J. M. (1988) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(88)90048-7 · Cited by 308
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: chance, not choice
Schulz, K. F., & Grimes, D. A. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)07683-3 · Cited by 774
Blocked randomization with randomly selected block sizes
Efird, J. (2010) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph8010015 · Cited by 564
“This can lead to bias, for example, if the initial participants in the trial are healthier than the later ones [1].”
BackgroundInfluentialSpinal Anesthesia or General Anesthesia for Hip Surgery in Older Adults
Neuman, M. D., Feng, R., Carson, J. L., Gaskins, L. J., Dillane, D., Sessler, D. I., Sieber, F., Magaziner, J. S., Marcantonio, E. R., Mehta, S., et al. (2021) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2113514 · Cited by 511
Arora, R. R., Chou, T. M., Jain, D., Fleishman, B. L., Crawford, L. E., McKiernan, T. L., & Nesto, R. W. (1999) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00140-0 · Cited by 492
“Treatment allocation was based on random codes generated in blocks of 10, with whole blocks assigned to one center, to ensure that patients were assigned equally to each treatment group at each center (12).”
MethodEffects of Vesnarinone on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with Heart Failure
Feldman, A. M., Bristow, M. R., Parmley, W. W., Carson, P. E., Pepine, C. J., Gilbert, E. M., Strobeck, J. E., Hendrix, G., Powers, E. R., Bain, R. P., et al. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199307153290301 · Cited by 475
Metadata
- Authors
- Matts, J. P., & Lachin, J. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- George Washington University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Matts, John P.
- ORCID
- Lachin, John M.
- Venue
- Controlled Clinical Trials
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1988-12
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 327-344
- ISSN
- 0197-2456 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2005415125
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 4.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Controlled Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Public Health Service (R01-DI-39826)
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL15265)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Optimal Experimental Design Methods
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Keywords
- permuted block randomization, permutation tests, nonparametric rank tests, stratified analysis, selection bias, covariate imbalance, treatment effect estimation
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Random Allocation, Research Design, Models, Statistical
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review