CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 152Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsOptimal Experimental Design MethodsAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

The pursuit of balance: an overview of covariate-adaptive randomization techniques in clinical trials

Lin, Yunzhi, Zhu, Ming, Su, Zheng·2015·Contemporary Clinical Trials
DOI 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.011
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Randomization is fundamental to the design and conduct of clinical trials. Simple randomization ensures independence among subject treatment assignments and prevents potential selection biases, yet it does not guarantee balance in covariate distributions across treatment groups. Ensuring balance in important prognostic covariates across treatment groups is desirable for many reasons. A broad class of randomization methods for achieving balance are reviewed in this paper; these include block randomization, stratified randomization, minimization, and dynamic hierarchical randomization. Practical considerations arising from experience with using the techniques are described. A review of randomization methods used in practice in recent randomized clinical trials is also provided.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.011

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Counterbalance was completed in blocks to ensure equal distribution of condition states for simulation condition and equal numbers of resident and attending physician slots.

    “Counterbalance was completed in blocks to ensure equal distribution of condition states for simulation condition, and an equal number of slots was allocated to resident and attending physicians.31”

    From Impact of Mobile Device-Based Clinical Decision Support Tool on Guideline Adherence and Mental Workload (2019) · cites this paper as [31]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lin, Y., Zhu, M., & Su, Z.
Affiliations
  • Takeda (United States) (US)
  • Deerfield (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Yunzhi
ORCID
Venue
Contemporary Clinical Trials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
45
Issue
Pt A
Pages
21-25
ISSN
1551-7144 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.011
OpenAlex
W970855755
Cited by
152
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Contemporary Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
covariate-adaptive randomization, covariate balance, prognostic factors, block randomization, stratified randomization, minimization, treatment allocation, selection bias, clinical trial design
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Humans, Random Allocation, Research Design, Selection Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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