Online Program Home
My Program

Abstract Details

Activity Number: 361 - SPEED: Biometrics - Methods and Application, Part 2
Type: Contributed
Date/Time: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 : 11:35 AM to 12:20 PM
Sponsor: Biometrics Section
Abstract #307767
Title: Is it ‘random’ or ‘haphazard’? Demonstrating Effects of Nonrandom Allocation by Simulation
Author(s): Penny Reynolds*
Companies: University of Florida College of Medicine
Keywords: random allocation; preclinical research; p-values; F-distributions

Randomization is frequently misunderstood or neglected by preclinical investigators. I used a typical data set for swine models of preclinical research to show how improper randomization of treatment allocation adversely affects hypothesis tests and the underlying null distributions of the test statistics. Simulations were used to examine effects of true randomization (completely randomized design, restricted randomization, randomized complete blocks) vs pseudo-randomization (alternation, false “blocking”) on error estimates and F-distributions in the presence of systematic trend. True randomization and blocking protected against systematic trend, but pseudo-randomization resulted in reference distribution collapse. Thus, no meaningful inferential test can be based on non-random ‘designs’. Both investigators and analysts must be made aware that hypothesis tests based on non-randomized data will be both biased and invalid.

Authors who are presenting talks have a * after their name.

Back to the full JSM 2019 program