Zelen randomization: Attitudes of parents participating in a neonatal clinical trial

被引:56
作者
Snowdon, C
Elbourne, D
Garcia, J
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Ctr Family Res, Cambridge CB2 3RF, England
[2] Univ London, London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Med Stat Unit, London, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Radcliffe Infirm, Natl Perinatal Epidemiol Unit, Oxford OX1 2JD, England
来源
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS | 1999年 / 20卷 / 02期
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
informed consent; randomization; ethics; clinical trials; attitudes; interviews;
D O I
10.1016/S0197-2456(98)00049-X
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
Recruitment to randomized controlled trials can be difficult for all parties involved. An alternative to the standard process has been suggested for trials in which the control group receives standard treatment or nontreatment. in this approach (the Zelen design), randomization precedes consent, which is only sought from those allocated to the experimental arm of a trial. The control group is thus unaware that randomization has taken place. As a controversial method, this approach has been often suggested but rarely used. Here we describe how 44 parents recruited to a difficult neonatal trial that used conventional randomization reacted to the idea of Zelen randomization. The arguments they gave for and against the method pertain to four areas: the giving or withholding of information, the effect on decision making, the use of data without parental knowledge, and the long-term impact for parents. The parents were evenly divided in accepting or rejecting the method. Further analysis showed that those rejecting Zelen randomization were more likely to be parents of infants allocated to the control group. This suggests that those A om whom consent would not be sought, the group that this approach is primarily meant to protect, are most likely to find it unacceptable. Controlled Clin Trials 1999;20:149-171 (C) Elsevier Science Inc. 1999.
引用
收藏
页码:149 / 171
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   Randomised consent designs in cancer clinical trials [J].
Altman, DG ;
Whitehead, J ;
Parmar, MKB ;
Stenning, SP ;
Fayers, PM ;
Machin, D .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1995, 31A (12) :1934-1944
[2]   THE RELATIVE EFFICIENCY OF ZELEN PRERANDOMIZATION DESIGN FOR CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
ANBAR, D .
BIOMETRICS, 1983, 39 (03) :711-718
[3]   SELECTION BIAS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
ANTMAN, K ;
AMATO, D ;
WOOD, W ;
CORSON, J ;
SUIT, H ;
PROPPE, K ;
CAREY, R ;
GREENBERGER, J ;
WILSON, R ;
FREI, E .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1985, 3 (08) :1142-1147
[4]  
BARTLETT RH, 1985, PEDIATRICS, V76, P479
[5]   ONCOLOGISTS RELUCTANCE TO ACCRUE PATIENTS ONTO CLINICAL-TRIALS - AN ILLINOIS CANCER CENTER STUDY [J].
BENSON, AB ;
PREGLER, JP ;
BEAN, JA ;
RADEMAKER, AW ;
ESHLER, B ;
ANDERSON, K .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1991, 9 (11) :2067-2075
[6]  
Blichert-Toft M, 1992, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, P19
[7]   A DANISH RANDOMIZED TRIAL COMPARING BREAST-PRESERVING THERAPY WITH MASTECTOMY IN MAMMARY-CARCINOMA - PRELIMINARY-RESULTS [J].
BLICHERTTOFT, M ;
BRINCKER, H ;
ANDERSEN, JA ;
ANDERSEN, KW ;
AXELSSON, CK ;
MOURIDSEN, HT ;
DOMBERNOWSKY, P ;
OVERGAARD, M ;
GADEBERG, C ;
KNUDSEN, G ;
BORGESKOV, S ;
BERTELSEN, S ;
KNUDSEN, JB ;
HANSEN, JB ;
POULSEN, PE ;
WILLUMSEN, H ;
SCHOUSEN, P ;
FROBERG, D ;
ORNSHOLT, J ;
ANDERSEN, M ;
OLESEN, S ;
SKOVGAARD, S ;
OSTER, M ;
SCHUMACHER, H ;
LYNDERUP, EK ;
HOLM, CN .
ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 1988, 27 (6A) :671-677
[8]  
BRUNNER E, 1985, METHOD INFORM MED, V24, P120
[9]   PRERANDOMIZATION - AN ALTERNATIVE TO CLASSIC RANDOMIZATION - THE EFFECTS ON RECRUITMENT IN A CONTROLLED TRIAL OF ARTHROSCOPY FOR OSTEOARTHROSIS OF THE KNEE [J].
CHANG, RW ;
FALCONER, J ;
STULBERG, SD ;
ARNOLD, WJ ;
DYER, AR .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1990, 72A (10) :1451-1455
[10]   RANDOMIZATION DESIGNS IN COMPARATIVE CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
ELLENBERG, SS .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1984, 310 (21) :1404-1408