Review




Structured Review

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, 2026-09
90/100 stars

Images

Related Articles

Sequencing:

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Pretermbirth before 37 weeks’ gestation; birthweight less than 2.5 kg; stillbirth; neonatal death; IVH; RDS; bronchopulmonary dysplasia; sepsis; NEC; retinopathy of prematurity Notes Funding sources: supported by grants (HD27869, HD21410, HD40512, HD34136, HD34208, HD40485, HD27915, HD40544, HD40560, HD27917, HD40500, HD34116, HD40545, HD27860, and HD36801) from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Declarations of interest: no potential sources of interest declared Risk of bias Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co‐ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical‐appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow‐up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Open in a separate window Rouse 2007 Methods Open‐label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France ‐ 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no‐treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Rouse 2007 (Continued) Notes Funding sources: supported by grants (HD27869, HD21410, HD40512, HD34136, HD34208, HD40485, HD27915, HD40544, HD40560, HD27917, HD40500, HD34116, HD40545, HD27860, and HD36801) from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Declarations of interest: no potential sources of interest declared Risk of bias Bias Authors’ judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co-ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical-appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow-up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Senat 2013 Methods Open-label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France - 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no-treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co-ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical-appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow-up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Rouse 2007 (Continued) Methods Open-label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France - 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no-treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Random sequence generation (selection bias) , Low risk , “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co‐ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...”. .. Allocation concealment (selection bias) , Low risk , Identical‐appearing treatment packs.

Article Title: A Diet Low in Red and Processed Meat Does Not Reduce Rate of Crohn’s Disease Flares
Article Snippet: .. The randomization sequence was generated by the Biostatistical Analysis Center at the University of Pennsylvania. ..

Selection:

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Pretermbirth before 37 weeks’ gestation; birthweight less than 2.5 kg; stillbirth; neonatal death; IVH; RDS; bronchopulmonary dysplasia; sepsis; NEC; retinopathy of prematurity Notes Funding sources: supported by grants (HD27869, HD21410, HD40512, HD34136, HD34208, HD40485, HD27915, HD40544, HD40560, HD27917, HD40500, HD34116, HD40545, HD27860, and HD36801) from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Declarations of interest: no potential sources of interest declared Risk of bias Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co‐ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical‐appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow‐up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Open in a separate window Rouse 2007 Methods Open‐label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France ‐ 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no‐treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Rouse 2007 (Continued) Notes Funding sources: supported by grants (HD27869, HD21410, HD40512, HD34136, HD34208, HD40485, HD27915, HD40544, HD40560, HD27917, HD40500, HD34116, HD40545, HD27860, and HD36801) from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Declarations of interest: no potential sources of interest declared Risk of bias Bias Authors’ judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co-ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical-appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow-up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Senat 2013 Methods Open-label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France - 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no-treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co-ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...” Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Identical-appearing treatment packs Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Women, caregivers and outcome assessors blinded Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Outcome data available for 655 of 661 women (less than 1% loss to follow-up) Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All expected outcomes reported (delivery or fetal death before 35 weeks’ gestation; other obstetric and neonatal outcomes) Other bias Unclear risk Other bias not apparent Rouse 2007 (Continued) Methods Open-label multicentre, randomised controlled trial France - 13 French University Hospitals Between June 2006 and January 2010 Participants 165 women randomised, 82 women randomised to the treatment group and 83 women randomised to the no-treatment group Inclusion criteria: women older than 18 years, carrying twins, asymptomatic, and with a cervical length of 25 mm or less measured in the sagittal plane by routine transvaginal ultrasound according to the standard technique were eligible for inclusion. ..

Article Title: Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy
Article Snippet: .. Random sequence generation (selection bias) , Low risk , “The simple urn method of randomisation with stratification according to clinical center was used by the George Washington University Biostatistical Co‐ordinating Center to create a randomization sequence for each center...”. .. Allocation concealment (selection bias) , Low risk , Identical‐appearing treatment packs.

other:

Article Title: Self-management Intervention for Reducing Epilepsy Burden Among Adult Ugandans With Epilepsy (Smart-u), Randomised Clinical Trial Protocol
Article Snippet: The randomisation list will be computer-generated by staff from the CWRU Neurological and Behavioural Outcomes Centre Biostatistical Core who are not part of the study staff.

Article Title: The use of ultrasound guidance for perioperative neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks in children
Article Snippet: Replied on 29 January 2015 that they would send the data but never did so, despite multiple reminders including in March 2018 Conflict of interest: no conflict of interest declared DOI: 10.1111/pan.12438 Risk of bias Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "computer‐generated randomization was stratified based on age (1–3 and 4–17 years), and sequences of sealed envelopes were provided by biostatistical services" Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "computer‐generated randomization was stratified based on age (1–3 and 4–17 years), and sequences of sealed envelopes were provided by biostatistical services" Blinding of participants and personnel High risk Although observers measuring pain scores were blinded, recovery room nurses administering rescue analgesia were not.

Article Title: The use of ultrasound guidance for perioperative neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks in children
Article Snippet: Allocation concealment (selection bias) , Low risk , Quote: "computer‐generated randomization was stratified based on age (1–3 and 4–17 years), and sequences of sealed envelopes were provided by biostatistical services".

Generated:

Article Title: A Diet Low in Red and Processed Meat Does Not Reduce Rate of Crohn’s Disease Flares
Article Snippet: .. The randomization sequence was generated by the Biostatistical Analysis Center at the University of Pennsylvania. ..



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, 2026-09
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, 2026-09
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, 2026-09
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, 2026-09
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, 2026-09
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, 2026-09
86/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results