Review




Structured Review

Laurell Technologies Corporation computer‐generated randomisation
Chee 1999
Computer‐Generated Randomisation, supplied by Laurell Technologies Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/computer+generated+randomisation/pmc11056193-821-18-26
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer‐generated randomisation - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
90/100 stars

Images

1) Product Images from "Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract"

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract

Journal: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008812.pub2

Chee 1999
Figure Legend Snippet: Chee 1999

Techniques Used: Sequencing, Selection

Kara‐Junior 2010
Figure Legend Snippet: Kara‐Junior 2010

Techniques Used: Sequencing, Selection

Landau 1999
Figure Legend Snippet: Landau 1999

Techniques Used: Sequencing, Selection, Generated, Extraction

Laurell 1998
Figure Legend Snippet: Laurell 1998

Techniques Used: Eye Drops, Sequencing, Selection, Generated, Diffusion-based Assay

MEHOX 2004
Figure Legend Snippet: MEHOX 2004

Techniques Used: Sequencing, Selection, Generated

Rizal 2003
Figure Legend Snippet: Rizal 2003

Techniques Used: Sequencing, Selection, Generated

Related Articles

Sequencing:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Selection:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Generated:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Extraction:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Eye Drops:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Diffusion-based Assay:

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 4 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. . Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract
Article Snippet: Allocation Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer-generated randomisation (George 2005; Landau 1999; Laurell 1998; Rizal 2003), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes (MEHOX 2004), one study randomisation numbers (Ravalico 1997) and one study used ballots (Stumpf 2006).

Article Title: Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age‐related cataract
Article Snippet: Seven trials clearly stated how participants were allocated to each arm of the study: four trials described computer‐generated randomisation ( George 2005 ; Landau 1999 ; Laurell 1998 ; Rizal 2003 ), one study used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes ( MEHOX 2004 ), one study randomisation numbers ( Ravalico 1997 ) and one study used ballots ( Stumpf 2006 ).



Similar Products

99
STATA Corporation computer generated randomisation lists
Computer Generated Randomisation Lists, supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/STATA+15%2E0/pm39833143-153-55-58
Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer generated randomisation lists - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
99/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
GraphPad Software Inc computer-generated randomisation list
Computer Generated Randomisation List, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/computer+generated+randomization+list/pm39798250-56-30-32
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer-generated randomisation list - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Almac Inc computer-generated randomisation list
Computer Generated Randomisation List, supplied by Almac Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/randomisation+codes/10__1016_slash_s1470___2045_ascii40_24_ascii41_00196___7-57-15-20
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer-generated randomisation list - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Biostatistical Consulting computer-generated randomisation list
Computer Generated Randomisation List, supplied by Biostatistical Consulting, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/randomisation+sequence/pmc10705707-75-1-16
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer-generated randomisation list - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Almac Inc computer-generated randomisation lists
Computer Generated Randomisation Lists, supplied by Almac Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/randomisation+codes/10__1016_slash_s2213___2600_ascii40_23_ascii41_00082___6-71-11-3
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer-generated randomisation lists - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

86
Serono computer generated randomisation list
Computer Generated Randomisation List, supplied by Serono, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/computer+generated+randomisation+lists/computer+generated+list+randomisation/pmc10687854-2344-10-16
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computer generated randomisation list - by Bioz Stars, 2026-11
86/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results