Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2006 Jun;3(6):e188.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030188.

Does random treatment assignment cause harm to research participants?

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Does random treatment assignment cause harm to research participants?

Cary P Gross et al. PLoS Med. 2006 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Some argue that by precluding individualized treatment, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) provide substandard medical care, while others claim that participation in clinical research is associated with improved patient outcomes. However, there are few data to assess the impact of random treatment assignment on RCT participants. We therefore performed a systematic review to quantify the differences in health outcomes between randomized trial participants and eligible non-participants.

Methods and findings: Studies were identified by searching Medline, the Web of Science citation database, and manuscript references. Studies were eligible if they documented baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of RCT participants and eligible non-participants, and allowed non-participants access to the same interventions available to trial participants. Primary study outcomes according to patient group (randomized trial participants versus eligible non-participants) were extracted from all eligible manuscripts. For 22 of the 25 studies (88%) meeting eligibility criteria, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients who received random assignment of treatment (RCT participants) and those who received individualized treatment assignment (eligible non-participants). In addition, there was no relation between random treatment assignment and clinical outcome in 15 of the 17 studies (88%) in which randomized and nonrandomized patients had similar health status at baseline.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that randomized treatment assignment as part of a clinical trial does not harm research participants.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Relative Risk of Experiencing Primary Outcome According to RCT Participation
Asterisks indicate statistical significance. The relevant references for the studies listed along the x-axis are as follows: AVID [ 50, 68], EAST [ 51], Cooper [ 52], BARI [ 24], Chilvers [ 53], Bain [ 54], CASS [ 55], Link [ 57], Blichert-Toft [ 30], Henshaw [ 58], Nicolaides [ 59], SMASH [ 63], Mosekilde [ 64], Kerry [ 67], Bijker [ 25], Melchart [ 29], and Antman [ 31].

References

    1. Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, Benson P, Winslade W. False hopes and best data: Consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep. 1987;17:20–24. - PubMed
    1. Taylor KM, Margolese RG, Soskolne CL. Physicians' reasons for not entering eligible patients in a randomized clinical trial of surgery for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1984;310:1363–1367. - PubMed
    1. Feinstein AR. Current problems and future challenges in randomized clinical trials. Circulation. 1984;70:767–774. - PubMed
    1. Abel U, Koch A. The role of randomization in clinical studies: Myths and beliefs. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:487–497. - PubMed
    1. Kemeny MM, Peterson BL, Kornblith AB, Muss HB, Wheeler J, et al. Barriers to clinical trial participation by older women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2268–2275. - PubMed

Publication types