ArticleTrials2016
Using re-randomization to increase the recruitment rate in clinical trials - an assessment of three clinical areas.
Article in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- High flow oxygen for vaso-occlusive crisis: a multicentre, prospective, randomised, multi-arm, multi-stage clinical trial (OSONE).BMJ open · 2025Article
- Evaluation of factors associated with recruitment rates in early phase clinical trials based on the European Clinical Trials Register data.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Adaptive design clinical trials: current status by disease and trial phase in various perspectives.Translational and clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Delivering a Home-Based Exercise Program to Youth With Osteogenesis Imperfecta: Protocol for a Comparative-Approach Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Article
- Re-randomisation trials in multi-episode settings: Estimands and independence estimators.Statistical methods in medical research · 2022Article
- Independence estimators for re-randomisation trials in multi-episode settings: a simulation study.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- UEG Week 2019 Poster Presentations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Article
- Re-randomization increased recruitment and provided similar treatment estimates as parallel designs in trials of febrile neutropenia.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient recruitment in clinical trials is often challenging, and as a result, many trials are stopped early due to insufficient recruitment. The re-randomization design allows patients to be re-enrolled and re-randomized for each new treatment episode that they experience. Because it allows multiple enrollments for each patient, this design has been proposed as a way to increase the recruitment rate in clinical trials. However, it is unknown to what extent recruitment could be increased in practice.
methodsWe modelled the expected recruitment rate for parallel-group and re-randomization trials in different settings based on estimates from real trials and datasets. We considered three clinical areas: in vitro fertilization, severe asthma exacerbations, and acute sickle cell pain crises. We compared the two designs in terms of the expected time to complete recruitment, and the sample size recruited over a fixed recruitment period.
resultsAcross the different scenarios we considered, we estimated that re-randomization could reduce the expected time to complete recruitment by between 4 and 22 months (relative reductions of 19% and 45%), or increase the sample size recruited over a fixed recruitment period by between 29% and 171%. Re-randomization can increase recruitment most for trials with a short follow-up period, a long trial recruitment duration, and patients with high rates of treatment episodes.
conclusionsRe-randomization has the potential to increase the recruitment rate in certain settings, and could lead to quicker and more efficient trials in these scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.