Review of randomised trials using the post-randomised consent (Zelen's) design

被引:109
|
作者
Adamson, Joy [1 ]
Cockayne, Sarah [1 ]
Puffer, Suezann [1 ]
Torgerson, David J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ York, Dept Hlth Sci, York Trials Unit, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
methods; review; Zelen's method; randomised consent;
D O I
10.1016/j.cct.2005.11.003
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background: In 1979, Zelen described a trial method of randomising participants before acquiring consent in order to enhance recruitment to clinical trials. The method has been criticised ethically due to lack of consent and scientifically due to high crossover rates. This paper reviews recent published trials using this method and describes the reasons authors gave for using the method, examines the crossover rates, and looks at the quality of identified trials. Methods: Literature review searching for all citations to the relevant Zelen's papers of trials published since 1990 plus inclusion of trials from personal knowledge. Results: We identified 5 8 relevant trials. The most common justification for the use of Zelen method was to avoid the introduction of bias (e.g., to avoid the Hawthorne effect). Few trialists had explicitly used the design to enhance participant recruitment. Most trials (n=41) experienced some crossover from one group to the other (median crossover=8.9%, mean= 13.8%, IQR 2.6% to 15%) although this was usually within acceptable limits. Conclusion: The most important reason stated by authors for using Zelen's method was to limit bias. Zelen's method, if carefully used, can avoid 'resentful' demoralisation' and the Hawthorne effect biasing a trial. Unlike a previous review, we found that crossover was not a problem for most trials. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:305 / 319
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A review of randomised clinical trials
    Werner Frase
    European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2005, 61 : 63 - 64
  • [22] Randomised trials conducted using cohorts: a scoping review
    Nickolls, Beverley Jane
    Relton, Clare
    Hemkens, Lars
    Zwarenstein, Merrick
    Eldridge, Sandra
    McCall, Stephen J.
    Griffin, Xavier Luke
    Sohanpal, Ratna
    Verkooijen, Helena M.
    Maguire, Jonathon L.
    McCord, Kimberly A.
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (03):
  • [23] Partially randomised patient preference trials as an alternative design to randomised controlled trials: systematic review and meta-analyses
    Wasmann, Karin A.
    Wijsman, Pieta
    van Dieren, Susan
    Bemelman, Willem
    Buskens, Christianne
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (10):
  • [24] Design of trials with dying patients: a feasibility study of cluster randomisation versus randomised consent
    Fowell, A.
    Johnstone, R.
    Finlay, I. G.
    Russell, D.
    Russell, I. T.
    PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2006, 20 (08) : 799 - 804
  • [25] Advanced consent for participation in acute care randomised control trials: protocol for a scoping review
    Niznick, Naomi
    Lun, Ronda
    Dewar, Brian
    Dowlatshahi, Dar
    Shamy, Michel
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (10):
  • [26] Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
    Taljaard, Monica
    McRae, Andrew D.
    Weijer, Charles
    Bennett, Carol
    Dixon, Stephanie
    Taleban, Julia
    Skea, Zoe
    Eccles, Martin P.
    Brehaut, Jamie C.
    Donner, Allan
    Saginur, Raphael
    Boruch, Robert F.
    Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2011, 342
  • [27] Dysphagia treatment post stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials
    Foley, Norine
    Teasell, Robert
    Salter, Katherine
    Kruger, Elizabeth
    Martino, Rosemary
    AGE AND AGEING, 2008, 37 (03) : 258 - 264
  • [28] Understanding controlled trials - What is Zelen's design?
    Torgerson, DJ
    Roland, M
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 316 (7131): : 606 - 606
  • [29] Nature's randomised trials
    Hingorani, A
    Humphries, S
    LANCET, 2005, 366 (9501): : 1906 - 1908
  • [30] Consent and equipoise, the crucial ethical issues in randomised clinical trials
    Meran, JG
    ONKOLOGIE, 2003, 26 (06): : 524 - 528