The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Randomisation.
Open accessAbstract
and their emotional needs are analogous to women with pseudocyesis -there is one reported case of both pseudocyesis and baby stealing."'Yet though women with pseudocyesis might receive psychotherapy or treatment for concurrent depression," non-psychotic women who abduct infants are as likely to be given a punitive sentence.Even when women receive treatment this does not mean that their behaviour has been understood or that their treatment has been rationally based.The relation between treatment and outcome, and even what the treatment should be, is unknown.Furthermore, women who commit unusual offences may be recommended for psychiatric care without much exploration of their motives and therapeutic needs, a practice that has been called "playing the labels" to provide a "ticket to the psychiatrist."'2A humane recommendation by the courts is not the same as understanding an offence.If better awareness of the causes of baby stealing and the most suitable legal outcomes are to be achieved a precise study of outcome, the impact of hospital treatment, and the prediction of repetition and persistent vulnerability is necessary, extending previous work beyond the point of the court's initial recommendation.There is also a more delicate, perhaps controversial, use for such information-to help detect the offender'3 and to reassure the parents of the stolen child, who are the real victims of the offence.They can take comfort from the knowledge that most abducted babies are found quickly as there is often no attempt to conceal them.And, although there are dramatic exceptions,'4 the babies are almost always well cared for by the women who are desperate and disturbed enough to steal them.4
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Pocock SJ. Clinical trials: a pracuical approach. Chichester: John Wiley, 1983.
- Altman DG. A fair trial? BMJ 1984;289:336-7. · doi:10.1136/bmj.289.6441.336
- Smithells RW, Sheppard S. Schorah CJ, et al. Possible prevention of neural-tube defccts by periconiceptional vitamin supplementation. Lancet 1980;i:339-40. · DOI · Paper page
- Evans SJW. Good surveys guide. BRMfj 1991;302:302-3.
- Altman DG, Dore CJ. Randomisation and baselinc comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990;335: 149-53. · DOI · Paper page
- Gotzsche PC. Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Controlled Clin Trials 1989;10:31-56. · DOI · Paper page
- Beecham L. New deal on juniors hours. BMJ 1991;302:1483.
- Ford J, Simpson P. Juniors' hoursofwork survey: additional findings. BM3 1991;302:1 18.
- University of London. Inappropriate duties for preregistration house officers. BMJ 1991;302:tfacing
Cited by
Moher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K. F., Montori, V., Gotzsche, P. C., Devereaux, P. J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.c869 · Cited by 8,883
Self-citationThe Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., Moher, D., Egger, M., Davidoff, F., Elbourne, D., Gøtzsche, P. C., Lang, T., & for the CONSORT Group (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012 · Cited by 3,835
Self-citationAssessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309
Self-citationMoher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K. F., Montori, V., Gøtzsche, P. C., Devereaux, P. J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., & Altman, D. G. (2012) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001 · Cited by 2,345
Self-citationMoher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K. F., Montori, V., Gøtzsche, P. C., Devereaux, P. J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004 · Cited by 1,858
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Altman, D. G.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1991-06-22
- Volume
- 302
- Issue
- 6791
- Pages
- 1481-1482
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W4248949215
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomisation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.302.6791.1481
- The paper
- Altman, D. G. (1991). Randomisation. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.302.6791.1481
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.