Homer Caroline S E
Midwifery Practice and Research Centre, Division of Women's and Children's Health, St George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
J Adv Nurs. 2002 Apr;38(2):200-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02164.x.
The use of the randomized consent design (commonly known as the Zelen design) is a controversial issue in randomized controlled trials. In the Zelen design, participants are randomly allocated prior to seeking consent. Those participants allocated to the intervention group are then approached and offered the intervention, which they can decline or accept. Zelen first proposed the design in 1979. It has been used infrequently since this time, although there are some notable exceptions in nursing, midwifery and some medical specialities.
This paper describes the Zelen design, including the two forms used (the single and double consent versions) and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of using such a design.
An explanation of the differences between the Zelen design and a conventional randomized controlled trial is presented. In a conventional design, detailed knowledge of the alternative interventions is given to the prospective participant. The participant gives consent and is allocated to one of the groups. In a Zelen design, participants are randomly allocated and then approached and offered the group to which they were allocated. The Zelen design is used firstly, to reduce disappointment bias in the conventional consent-randomization process, and secondly, to remove subjective bias in the recruitment process. There are concerns relating to the use of the Zelen design, including ethical concerns relating to the timing of random allocation and consent and the collection of clinical data.
It is hoped that by presenting issues pertaining to the Zelen design, other nursing and midwifery researchers may be prompted to consider its use when designing clinical research. The Zelen design is controversial, and debate about its merits and shortcomings is useful. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate.
随机同意设计(通常称为泽伦设计)在随机对照试验中是一个有争议的问题。在泽伦设计中,参与者在寻求同意之前就被随机分配。然后,那些被分配到干预组的参与者会被联系并提供干预措施,他们可以拒绝或接受。泽伦于1979年首次提出该设计。自那时以来,其使用频率不高,不过在护理、助产和一些医学专科领域有一些显著的例外情况。
本文描述了泽伦设计,包括所使用的两种形式(单同意版本和双同意版本),并讨论了使用这种设计的优缺点。
阐述了泽伦设计与传统随机对照试验之间的差异。在传统设计中,会向前瞻性参与者详细介绍替代干预措施。参与者给予同意后被分配到其中一组。在泽伦设计中,参与者先被随机分配,然后被联系并被告知他们被分配到的组。泽伦设计的使用,一是为了减少传统同意 - 随机化过程中的失望偏差,二是为了消除招募过程中的主观偏差。使用泽伦设计存在一些问题,包括与随机分配和同意的时间以及临床数据收集相关的伦理问题。
希望通过阐述与泽伦设计相关的问题,能促使其他护理和助产研究人员在设计临床研究时考虑使用该设计。泽伦设计存在争议,对其优缺点的辩论是有益的。本文有助于正在进行的辩论。