Skip Navigation



Alcohol and Alcoholism Advance Access published online on January 10, 2005
Alcohol and Alcoholism, doi:10.1093/alcalc/agh131
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
40/2/124    most recent
agh131v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MÜLLER, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by HAUTZINGER, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MÜLLER, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by HAUTZINGER, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Alcohol & Alcoholism © Medical Council on Alcohol 2005; all rights reserved
Received March 11, 2003
Revised November 23, 2004
Accepted November 23, 2004

Article

SEQUENTIALLY ADJUSTED RANDOMIZATION TO FORCE BALANCE IN CONTROLLED TRIALS WITH UNKNOWN PREVALENCE OF COVARIATES: APPLICATION TO ALCOHOLISM RESEARCH

MATTHIAS J. MÜLLER 1*, ARMIN SCHEURICH 1, HERMANN WETZEL 1, ARMIN SZEGEDI 1, and MARTIN HAUTZINGER 2

1 Department of Psychiatry, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
2 Institute of Psychology, University of Tübihgen, Germany

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
MATTHIAS J. MÜLLER, E-mail: mjm{at}mail.psychiatrie.klinik.uni-mainz.de


  Abstract

Aims: In treatment outcome studies with small to medium sample sizes (n < 200), the balance of groups with regard to important factors, which sometimes occur at low prevalence, is indispensable for adequate interpretation. This study tested a method for use in clinical alcoholism research, an uncomplicated procedure for satisfactory randomization of patients to different treatments, taking into account relevant background variables. Methods: An easily applicable modification of Efron's biased coin method for the randomization of treatments within strata of unknown but low prevalence was compared with the original approach and alternative methods by computer simulation (10 000 runs). An application example for a clinical trial in alcoholism research is given. Results: The sequentially adjusted randomization procedure revealed results similar to Efron's approach without the necessity for monitoring the assignment history throughout the trial. The new method was slightly superior to Efron's approach in randomizing subjects in strata with n ≤ 20, whereas strata with n > 20 favoured randomization with Efron's approach. Taking into account all results from simulation, the new approach reached a proportion of acceptable balanced randomization > 95% in all stratum sizes. Conclusions: The approach, a special case of the standard urn design, provides three major advantages in clinical trials: (i) it can be easily implemented in any trial without technical equipment; (ii) it works with high accuracy in trials with a priori unknown but low numbers of subjects (4 ≤ n ≤ 20) in prognostic relevant strata; and (iii) a deterministic assignment tendency is completely avoided, as a random process takes place throughout the assignment procedure. The modified biased coin method can be recommended as one possible strategy for special purposes, particularly in alcoholism research.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.