Parallel-group randomized trial

What is the effect of assigning participants to one intervention rather than another?

When to use this project

Compare interventions by randomly assigning individual participants to parallel groups and following them over a common period. Define the intended treatment effect before analysis.

How it differs

Each participant follows one assigned strategy, unlike crossover. Allocation is at participant level, unlike cluster trials; randomization differs from the stated nonrandom assignment used in a nonrandomized study.

Decisions before you start

  • Specify allocation concealment, random sequence generation and blinding as separate procedures.
  • Define the estimand, including intercurrent events, and justify superiority, noninferiority or equivalence claims.
  • Plan multiplicity, missing outcomes and analysis by assignment. Noninferiority margins need clinical and evidence-based justification.

How the flows work together

Each flow below links to its diagram, steps and tables. Flow order organizes the project; it does not imply that all work is strictly sequential. Data assessment, analysis planning and protocol refinement may inform one another.

1. Trial overview

Overview · Question through randomized trial reporting

Use this overview to state the purpose and link to detailed decisions. Keep a versioned protocol and decision register, and add evidence references for the rationale.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

2. Recruitment and allocation

Selection · Track enrollment assignment and treatment

Random sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding are separate protections. Concealment prevents knowledge of upcoming assignments; blinding concerns information after assignment. Track treatment receipt without replacing randomized assignment.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

3. Endpoints and estimands

Design · Define objectives outcomes and effects

An estimand specifies the population, treatment conditions, outcome variable, handling of intercurrent events and population-level summary. An intercurrent event changes interpretation or existence of an outcome; it is not synonymous with a missing measurement.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

4. Sample size and testing

Statistics · Specify scenarios hypotheses and multiplicity

Choose the claim before the calculation. Superiority, noninferiority and equivalence require different success rules; justify margins clinically and from evidence. Account for multiple claims and assumptions about missingness and event frequency.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

5. Follow-up and safety

Conduct · Plan assessments monitoring and disposition

Stopping treatment need not end outcome follow-up. Distinguish adverse-event seriousness from severity, define ascertainment windows and keep clinical safety review separate from statistical efficacy monitoring.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

6. Data and analysis populations

Data · Finalize data and derive populations

Analysis populations can overlap. Define assignment-based, safety and per-protocol populations without treating them as disjoint partitions. Excluding nonadherent participants can introduce selection and does not by itself estimate a causal per-protocol effect.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

7. Statistical analysis plan

Statistics · Specify estimation missingness and sensitivity

Match the estimator to the estimand and randomization. Address missing outcomes separately from strategies for intercurrent events. Sensitivity analyses probe assumptions for the same estimand; supplementary analyses may target a different question.

View flow diagram and step-by-step guide

Equations and statistical interpretation

These explanations describe notation and assumptions. Flow does not calculate these values.

Risk difference at a fixed horizon

xₐ is the event count among nₐ participants in assigned group a, with complete outcome ascertainment at the specified horizon.

The unadjusted difference is an illustrative estimator. Missing outcomes, censoring, covariate adjustment or clustering require compatible methods. Define the event direction before interpreting benefit.

Published example

SPRINT Research Group (2015), A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control

Trace randomization, the primary outcome, follow-up and stopping decisions. Evaluate the findings in the enrolled population rather than treating the targets as universal clinical advice.

This publication illustrates a study design, not an endorsement of every method or a reproduction of its results. Follow its protocol, supplement and update history when studying the example.

Hypothetical scenario

A clinical team wants to compare two follow-up strategies for blood-pressure management.

  1. Trial overview: Specify the treatment question, approvals and prospective trial registration.
  2. Recruitment and allocation: Recruit and randomize with concealed allocation, tracking assigned and received treatment separately.
  3. Endpoints and estimands: Define the primary endpoint and estimand, including treatment changes and death.
  4. Sample size and testing: Justify sample size and testing strategy using a verified calculation and sensitivity scenarios.
  5. Follow-up and safety: Collect outcomes and adverse events consistently after assignment.
  6. Data and analysis populations: Finalize derivations and analysis populations without treating overlapping populations as disjoint counts.
  7. Statistical analysis plan: Estimate the planned effect and uncertainty, and assess sensitivity to missing outcomes and other assumptions.

Deliver a populated protocol, decision log, data specification, and planned outputs. Enter numerical findings only after analysis and verification. Keep decisions made before seeing results distinguishable from later amendments.

Sources

Source check: 2026-09-17. Record the version of each reporting or appraisal tool used in your actual protocol.

Compare all Clinical trials project types · Open editor in a new tab