© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd
ECHO
Randomisation in trials: do potential trial participants understand it and find it acceptable?
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
To examine lay persons ability to identify methods of random allocation and their acceptability of using methods of random allocation in a clinical trial context.
Leaflets containing hypothetical medical, non-medical, and clinical trial scenarios involving random allocation, using material from guidelines for trial information leaflets.
Adults attending further education colleges (n = 130), covering a wide range of ages, occupations, and levels of education.
Judgements of whether each of five methods of allocation to two groups was random in a medical or non-medical scenario. Judgements of whether these allocation methods were acceptable in a randomised clinical trial scenario, with or without a scientific justification for randomisation.
The majority of our group of participants judged correctly that allowing people their preference was not random, and that the following were random: using a computer with no information about the individual (recommended wording for MREC trial leaflets), tossing a coin, drawing a name
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
