Use of randomisation in clinical trials: a survey of UK practice

Gladys Campbell McPherson, Marion Kay Campbell, Diana R Elbourne

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)


In healthcare research the randomised controlled trial is seen as the gold standard because it ensures selection bias is minimised. However, there is uncertainty as to which is the most preferred method of randomisation in any given setting and to what extent more complex methods are actually being implemented in the field.

In this paper we describe the results of a survey of UK academics and publicly funded researchers to examine the extent of the use of various methods of randomisation in clinical trials.

Trialists reported using simple randomisation, permuted blocks and stratification more often than more complex methods such as minimisation. Most trialists believed that simple randomisation is suitable for larger trials but there is a high probability of possible imbalance between treatment groups in small trials. It was thought that groups should be balanced at baseline to avoid imbalance and help face-validity. However, very few respondents considered that more complex methods offer any advantages.

This paper demonstrates that for most UK trialists the preferred method of randomisation is using permuted blocks of varying random length within strata. This method eliminates the problem of predictability while maintaining balance across combinations of factors. If the number of prognostic factors is large, then minimisation can be used to provide treatment balance as well as balance over these factors. However, only those factors known to affect outcome should be considered.
Original languageEnglish
Article number198
Publication statusPublished - 26 Oct 2012


  • survey
  • randomisation
  • minimisation


Dive into the research topics of 'Use of randomisation in clinical trials: a survey of UK practice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this