ERDO - a framework to select an appropriate randomization procedure for clinical trials

• Published in: BMC medical research methodology Vol. 17; no. 1; p. 159
• Main Authors: Hilgers, Ralf-Dieter, Uschner, Diane, Rosenberger, William F, Heussen, Nicole
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 04.12.2017; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Algorithms; Case studies; Chronological bias; Clinical trials; Design; Humans; Random Allocation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods; Restricted randomization; Selection Bias; Technical Advance; Type I error probability; Design; Chronological bias; Selection bias; Restricted randomization; Type I error probability
• ISSN: 1471-2288; 1471-2288
• DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0428-z

Randomization is considered to be a key feature to protect against bias in randomized clinical trials. Randomization induces comparability with respect to known and unknown covariates, mitigates selection bias, and provides a basis for inference. Although various randomization procedures have been proposed, no single procedure performs uniformly best. In the design phase of a clinical trial, the scientist has to decide which randomization procedure to use, taking into account the practical setting of the trial with respect to the potential of bias. Less emphasis has been placed on this important design decision than on analysis, and less support has been available to guide the scientist in making this decision. We propose a framework that weights the properties of the randomization procedure with respect to practical needs of the research question to be answered by the clinical trial. In particular, the framework assesses the impact of chronological and selection bias on the probability of a type I error. The framework is applied to a case study with a 2-arm parallel group, single center randomized clinical trial with continuous endpoint, with no-interim analysis, 1:1 allocation and no adaptation in the randomization process. In so doing, we derive scientific arguments for the selection of an appropriate randomization procedure and develop a template which is illustrated in parallel by a case study. Possible extensions are discussed. The proposed ERDO framework guides the investigator through a template for the choice of a randomization procedure, and provides easy to use tools for the assessment. The barriers for the thorough reporting and assessment of randomization procedures could be further reduced in the future when regulators and pharmaceutical companies employ similar, standardized frameworks for the choice of a randomization procedure.