Sequentially Constrained Randomization in Preclinical Animal Studies

Randomization is a key component to scientific inquiry as it facilitates unbiased estimation of treatment effects via balancing of measured and unmeasured prognostic variables across treatment groups. Recent reports have noted that randomization is lacking in animal studies, threatening internal validity. Animal studies often involve rodents (mice or rats) sent in small batches to laboratories or bred on site in litters. Randomizing half of each batch to treatment and half to control (simple randomization) is a viable strategy to implementing randomization in animal studies, however experimenters may be concerned about chance imbalances, given the smaller sample sizes utilized in animal studies, in key prognostic variables, eg, baseline weight. Constrained randomization, wherein key prognostic factors are balanced within each batch, may offer benefits over simple randomization, especially if it were sequential, ie, could take balance of previous batches into account when randomly assigning treatment in current batch. Adjusting for prognostic variables in a statistical model is a way to address imbalances, independent of choice of randomization scheme. In simulations designed to mimic realistic scenarios, all methods of randomization tested led to unbiased treatment effect estimation, with model adjustment reducing standard errors and improving statistical power in all scenarios. Treatment effects in unadjusted and adjusted models were nearly an order of magnitude closer to each other in sequentially constrained randomization compared to simple randomization, yielding more robust findings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Function
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/function/zqaf046
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sequentially Constrained Randomization in Preclinical Animal Studies

David Amar, Denise Esserman, Sue C. Bodine, Karyn A. Esser et al.
Function
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
article

Sequentially Constrained Randomization in Preclinical Animal Studies

David Amar, Denise Esserman, Sue C. Bodine, Karyn A. Esser, Laurie J. Goodyear, Joseph Rigdon, Matthew T. Wheeler, Michael P. Walkup, Michael E. Miller
article en

Abstract

Randomization is a key component to scientific inquiry as it facilitates unbiased estimation of treatment effects via balancing of measured and unmeasured prognostic variables across treatment groups. Recent reports have noted that randomization is lacking in animal studies, threatening internal validity. Animal studies often involve rodents (mice or rats) sent in small batches to laboratories or bred on site in litters. Randomizing half of each batch to treatment and half to control (simple randomization) is a viable strategy to implementing randomization in animal studies, however experimenters may be concerned about chance imbalances, given the smaller sample sizes utilized in animal studies, in key prognostic variables, eg, baseline weight. Constrained randomization, wherein key prognostic factors are balanced within each batch, may offer benefits over simple randomization, especially if it were sequential, ie, could take balance of previous batches into account when randomly assigning treatment in current batch. Adjusting for prognostic variables in a statistical model is a way to address imbalances, independent of choice of randomization scheme. In simulations designed to mimic realistic scenarios, all methods of randomization tested led to unbiased treatment effect estimation, with model adjustment reducing standard errors and improving statistical power in all scenarios. Treatment effects in unadjusted and adjusted models were nearly an order of magnitude closer to each other in sequentially constrained randomization compared to simple randomization, yielding more robust findings.

FunctionVol. 6(6)
Joslin Diabetes Center (US), Tel Aviv University (IL), Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (US), Yale University (US), University of Florida (US), Cancer Research And Biostatistics (US), Yale New Haven Health System (US), Stanford Medicine (US), Wake Forest University (US), Florida College (US), Stanford University (US)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.