The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Issues in Outcomes Research: An Overview of Randomization Techniques for Clinical Trials
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To review and describe randomization techniques used in clinical trials, including simple, block, stratified, and covariate adaptive techniques. Background: Clinical trials are required to establish treatment efficacy of many athletic training procedures. In the past, we have relied on evidence of questionable scientific merit to aid the determination of treatment choices. Interest in evidence-based practice is growing rapidly within the athletic training profession, placing greater emphasis on the importance of well-conducted clinical trials. One critical component of clinical trials that strengthens results is random assignment of participants to control and treatment groups. Although randomization appears to be a simple concept, issues of balancing sample sizes and controlling the influence of covariates a priori are important. Various techniques have been developed to account for these issues, including block, stratified randomization, and covariate adaptive techniques. Advantages: Athletic training researchers and scholarly clinicians can use the information presented in this article to better conduct and interpret the results of clinical trials. Implementing these techniques will increase the power and validity of findings of athletic medicine clinical trials, which will ultimately improve the quality of care provided.
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“First of all, one of the limitations may be the selected randomization method which was chosen to simply control balance across groups over time for a sample size of 60 participants. As published data suggest, the 6-block randomization method may not be optimal for randomization, as blocks are best used in smaller increments due to easier balance control. Therefore, the 4-block randomization”
From Early Occupational Therapy Intervention post-stroke (EOTIPS): A randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [69]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrence
Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195152968.001.0001 · Cited by 10,647
Pocock, S. J., & Simon, R. (1975) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529712 · Cited by 2,350
The Arrangement of Field Experiments
Fisher, R. A. (1992) · Springer series in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_8 · Cited by 977
Allocation concealment in randomised trials: defending against deciphering
Schulz, K. F., & Grimes, D. A. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)07750-4 · Cited by 923
Minimization: A new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups
Taves, D. R. (1974) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/cpt1974155443 · Cited by 891
Forcing a sequential experiment to be balanced
EFRON, B. (1971) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/58.3.403 · Cited by 873
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
The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials
Scott, N. W., McPherson, G. C., Ramsay, C. R., & Campbell, M. K. (2002) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(02)00242-8 · Cited by 651
Statistics notes: How to randomise
Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1999) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.319.7211.703 · Cited by 506
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Altman, D. G. and J. M.Bland. How to randomise.BMJ1999. 319 (7211):703–704.
- Blair, E. Gold is not always good enough: the shortcomings of randomization when evaluating interventions in small heterogeneous samples. J Clin Epidemiol 2004. 57 (12):1219–1222.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–552 of 552
dos Santos, C. C. M., de Almeida, I. B., Jones, M. A., & Matias, R. (2025) · Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology · doi:10.3390/jfmk10040475 · Cited by 2
“Each patient was allocated into their group through a computer-generated block randomization process designed to ensure equal sample sizes across groups [35].”
Goswami, Y. P., & Sumon, A. (2025) · Indian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.4103/ijph.ijph_1274_24
Plank, A., Rushton, A., Ping, Y., Mei, R., Falla, D., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14600542
Bruce, C. L., Iflaifel, M., Montgomery, A., Ogollah, R. O., Sprange, K., & Partlett, C. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26695713
Zeinali, F., Aghaei Zarch, S. M., Mehrjardi, M. Y. V., Kalantar, S. M., Jahan-Mihan, A., Karimi‐Nazari, E., Fallahzadeh, H., Hosseinzadeh-Shamsi-Anar, M., Rahmanian, M., Fazeli, M. R., et al. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.12127590
Leerssen, J., Foster‐Dingley, J. C., Lakbila‐Kamal, O., Dekkers, L. M. S., Albers, A. C. W., Ikelaar, S. L. C., Maksimovic, T., Wassing, R., Houtman, S. J., Bresser, T., et al. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.12134319
Plank, A., Rushton, A., Ping, Y., Mei, R., Falla, D., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14600533
Bruce, C. L., Iflaifel, M., Montgomery, A., Ogollah, R. O., Sprange, K., & Partlett, C. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.25449049
Plank, A., Rushton, A., Ping, Y., Mei, R., Falla, D., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14600539
Plank, A., Rushton, A., Ping, Y., Mei, R., Falla, D., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14600530
Bruce, C. L., Iflaifel, M., Montgomery, A., Ogollah, R. O., Sprange, K., & Partlett, C. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26695710
Bruce, C. L., Iflaifel, M., Montgomery, A. A., Ogollah, R. O., Sprange, K., & Partlett, C. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.25449133
Wright, A. J., Panza, G. A., Fernández, A. B., Robinson, P. F., DeScenza, V. R., Chen, M., Lee, E. C., Guidry, M. A., & Pescatello, L. S. (2026) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare14020188
“We will use block randomization [43] to assign the ExRx delivery sequence among physicians (N = 24), stratified by those who meet the PA guidelines [44] (n = 12) and those who do not meet them (n = 12).”
Fard, M. M., Hasanvand, A., Darouie, A., et al. (2026) · Journal of Voice · doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2025.12.024
Randomization: Fixed or adaptive procedures
McCranie, A. S., & Kaoutzanis, C. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-91168-9.00025-9
Cooper, N. R., Wheeler, M., Sloane, G., Wicks, C. L., Rogerson, M., Philpot, R., & Orbell, S. (2026) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-026-09506-9
“Participants will be allocated to the control or waitlist condition by covariate adaptive randomisation, a valid technique for clinical trials [19, 20] where specific participant characteristics (covariates) can be controlled for on a sequential basis based on recruitment and allocation to date…”
Mastroiacovo, F., Notartomaso, S., Moyanova, S. G., Llebaria, A., Gómez‐Santacana, X., Bucci, D., Bruno, V., Battaglia, G., Ruscher, K., Bauer, A. Q., et al. (2026) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.125.054261
“…Light-Activated mGlu5 Receptor NAM, JF-NP-26 Ischemic mice were divided (n=10 per group; total number=40 mice) using the block randomization method 29 and treated 30 minutes after pMCAO with a caged, intrinsically inactive, derivative of the mGlu5 receptor NAM, raseglurant (JF-NP-26, 10 mg/kg in…”
Kawadler, J. M., Vassilev, P., Bunyan, M., Barnett, J., & Koychev, I. G. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8885992/v1
Liu, R., Yu, C., Sucală, V. I., & Luis, M. (2026) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2026.100983 · Cited by 1
Robbins, J., Katz, D. H., Many, G. M., Rao, P., Smith, G. R., Tiwari, G., Jin, C. A., Spielmann, G., Montalvo, S., Iyer, G. R., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.03.02.704798 · Cited by 2
Dief, A. K., Elsheehy, O., & Nabil, O. (2026) · The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice · doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-4007
MoTrPAC Study Group, Katz, D. H., Jin, C. A., Many, G. M., Smith, G. R., Keshishian, H., Clark, N. M., Iyer, G. R., Ahn, C., Lindholm, M. E., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.02.27.702183
Lu, M., Chiang, H., Yang, E., et al. (2026) · Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology · doi:10.14309/ctg.0000000000001023
“After enrollment, each patient received a sealed envelope indicating their group allocation (19).”
Kaban, N., & Harman, H. (2026) · Indian Journal of Rheumatology · doi:10.1177/09733698261429582
Qi, W., Yu, H., & Wilczyńska, D. M. (2026) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app16073596
Johansen, J. F., Nielsen, M. Ø., Kragh, M., & Nielsen, J. (2026) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-026-09482-0
“Patients will be randomized 1:1 using a block randomization regimen with variable block sizes (2, 4, and 6), which is done to achieve equal sample size in different groups over time [30].”
Grace, T., Foureur, M. J., Scurry, S., Schmied, V. A., Wang, C. A., & Pennell, C. E. (2026) · Women and Birth · doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2026.102207
Sherman, A. L., Fowler, J., Duffy, A., Riecke, B. E., & Moreno, S. (2026) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/81490
A Transparent, Simple, Audit-Oriented Python-Based Binary Allocation Prototype for Clinical Research
Malone, K. T. (2026) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.108209
MoTrPAC Study Group, Brandt, A. R., Fleg, J., Goodpaster, B. H., Jaeger, B. C., Jin, C. A., Johannsen, N. M., Katz, D. H., Keshishian, H., Kohrt, W. M., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.03.02.705347 · Cited by 3
Kuhlman, N. M., Jagim, A. R., Blesso, C. N., Puglisi, M. J., Chun, O. K., Jones, M. T., & Fields, J. B. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1825906
Fadillah, M. I. (2026) · Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies · doi:10.1080/15562948.2026.2665107
Kumar, S., Sahu, M., & Ghosh, K. (2026) · Substance Use & Misuse · doi:10.1080/10826084.2026.2679003
Wami, S. D., Donnelly, C. A., Alemu, K., Tefera, E. A., & Miller, J. (2026) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-026-01866-y
“Then, we randomly selected block sizes and created a randomization list to determine the patient’s allocation into the intervention and control groups [43, 44] (see Fig.”
Chien, C., Ck, C., Wu, C. L., Pang, S., Yu, K.-J., Pj, L., & Liu, K. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2026-118902
Lecce, E., Amoruso, P., Vecchio, A. D., Casolo, F., Felici, F., Farina, D., & Bazzucchi, I. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.06.26.734811
Meireles, A. A. F. D. M., de Souza, H. L. R., da Paixão, R. C., de Oliveira, G. T., Arriel, R. A., & Marocolo, M. (2026) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.1177/00315125261464714
Chrzczonowicz‐Stępień, A., Czajkowska-Łukasiewicz, K., Jeziorek, Z. A., Kardasz, M., & Zajenkowska, A. M. (2026) · Counselling and Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1002/capr.70190
Uprety, R., Ogini, F., & Wingate, L. T. (2026) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.112374
Biostatistics for Surgical Critical Care
Mandalapu, S. A., & Stawicki, S. P. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-22660-0_47
Cui, J., Chen, H., Wang, X., et al. (2026) · Behavioral and Brain Functions · doi:10.1186/s12993-026-00357-7
“Different PASAT versions were used across blocks to minimize learning and repetition effects [38].”
Sorto, R., Qun, H., Jimenez, E., et al. (2026) · The Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2026.106805
Impact of Data Visualization on Sustainable Decision-Making in Structural DesignPreprint
Melchiorre, J., Shao, L., & Fang, D. L. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7321351
Gamification With Progress Bars Improves Performance and Retention in Virtual Reality Simulation
Nøhr, A., Mikkelsen, P. T., Sørensen, M. S., & Andersen, S. A. W. (2026) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0000000000000966
Gödker, M., Schrills, T., & Franke, T. (2026) · i-com · doi:10.1515/icom-2026-0021
Farrokhi, N., Sarzaeem, M. M., Feizi, D., Mohammadi, T., & Heydari, M. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-112566
“30 Briefly, it included the following components: Telerehabilitation (intervention group) Participants received a 4-week structured telerehabilitation programme following hospital discharge, delivered through a locally developed platform (web/app).”
Cahill, L. E., Grandy, S. A., Gottheil, C., Mercer, O., Wright, D., Consmueller, C., Wong, H., Jeon, I., Rockwood, K. J., & Howlett, S. E. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-114286
Ráčková, L., Diamond, M., Makarova, M., Morcinek, P., Butin, I., Nemmi, F., Boyer, S., Boyer, L., Vašků, J. B., & Chabani, E. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0357293
Lee, S.-Y., 김세화, Park, J.-H., Yun, H.-J., & Yoon, J. (2026) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu18193299
“…initial baseline assessment, participants were assigned to treatment-sequence Group A or Group B in a 1:1 ratio using a covariate-adaptive randomization method that considered sport type, body mass index (BMI), maximal oxygen uptake (VO 2 max), and blood lactate concentration as covariates [17].”
Self-citationThe impact of selection bias in the analysis of 2018 grade 12 exam data
Sibanda, E., Mathye, P., Punch, M. T., et al. (2026) · Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.24042/ijsme.v9i2.23962
Bruno, J., Salerno, P., & Chávez-Guevara, I. A. (2026) · RESEARCH IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION SPORT AND HEALTH · doi:10.2478/rpesh-2026-0010
“…because it minimizes systematic allocation bias and, in expectation, distributes measured and unmeasured prognostic factors comparably across study groups, thereby strengthening causal inference and internal validity (D. G. Altman & J. M. Bland, 1999; Kang et al., 2008; Mesquida et al., 2022).”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Kang, M., Ragan, B. G., & Park, J.-H.
- Affiliations
- Middle Tennessee State University (US)
- University of Northern Iowa (US)
- Korea National Sport University (KR)
- Venue
- Journal of Athletic Training
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 215-221
- ISSN
- 1062-6050 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2267325
- OpenAlex
- W2103799103
- Semantic Scholar
- 76a894a7f31f671125792589418911fc63574599
- Cited by
- 555
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 54 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 90 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 6.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Athletic Training (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- randomization technique, clinical trials, block randomization, stratified randomization, covariate-adaptive randomization, covariate control, evidence-based practice
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Random Allocation, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Evidence-Based Medicine
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