Current Issues in Randomization in Sports Science Research: Limitations, Misconceptions, and Alternatives: Narrative Review

Joao Bruno; Pasquale Salerno; Isaac Armando Chavez Guevara

doi:10.2478/rpesh-2026-0010

Authors

Joao Bruno University of Coimbra, CIPER, Faculty of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, Coimbra, Portugal; Portuguese Air Force, Health Department, Amadora, Portugal; CIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Cruz-Quebrada Dafundo, Portugal https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9656-1563
Pasquale Salerno Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics and Maternal Child Health, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genoa, Italy; Centro Polifunzionale di Scienze Motorie, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genoa, Italy https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1884-4637
Isaac Armando Chavez Guevara Faculty of Sports Ensenada, Autonomous University of Baja California, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico; Conahcyt National Laboratory of Body Composition and Energetic Metabolism, Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico

https://doi.org/10.2478/rpesh-2026-0010

Keywords:

Allocation concealment, Causal inference, Experimental design, Methodological bias, Trial feasibility

Abstract

Randomization is a central methodological component of experimental research because it supports causal inference, reduces selection bias, and improves the comparability of intervention groups. However, its implementation in sports science presents distinct methodological, ethical, and logistical challenges, including small and highly specialized samples, limited access to elite athletes, competition schedules, training constraints, intervention adherence, and difficulties in controlling contextual factors such as nutrition, recovery, and physical activity outside the study protocol. This narrative review examines the practical and methodological challenges associated with randomization in sports science and highlights common sources of bias, including inadequate allocation procedures, pseudo-randomization, poor adherence, and incomplete reporting. Random allocation procedures such as simple, block, stratified, and response-adaptive randomization remain valuable when appropriately aligned with the research question and study context, while randomized trial designs may include parallel-group, cluster-randomized, crossover, and stepped-wedge cluster-randomized structures. When conventional randomized trials are difficult to implement, quasi-experimental designs may provide alternative causal-inference strategies, whereas pragmatic trial frameworks and Bayesian inferential methods may be incorporated within randomized or non-randomized studies. Mendelian randomization, by contrast, is a distinct observational causal-inference method that uses genetic variants as instrumental variables and does not involve investigator-controlled allocation to experimental conditions. The review also considers digital tools such as randomizeR, RRApp, and OxMaR, which may support transparent allocation generation and reproducible reporting. Overall, this review emphasizes the need to balance methodological rigor with real-world feasibility in sport and exercise settings. By providing practical guidance on allocation strategies, study-design selection, bias mitigation, causal interpretation, and transparent reporting, this work aims to support researchers in designing studies that are ethically sound, contextually appropriate, and scientifically robust.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Pasquale Salerno, Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics and Maternal Child Health, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genoa, Italy; Centro Polifunzionale di Scienze Motorie, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genoa, Italy

Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics and Maternal Child Health, Università degli Studi di Genova; Centro Polifunzionale di Scienze Motorie, Università degli Studi di Genova, Genoa, Italy

Isaac Armando Chavez Guevara, Faculty of Sports Ensenada, Autonomous University of Baja California, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico; Conahcyt National Laboratory of Body Composition and Energetic Metabolism, Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico

Faculty of Sports Ensenada, Autonomous University of Baja California; Conahcyt National Laboratory of Body Composition and Energetic Metabolism, Baja California, Mexico

References

Abt, G., Boreham, C., Davison, G., Jackson, R., Wallace, E., & Williams, A. M. (2021). Registered reports in the journal of sports sciences. In (Vol. 39, pp. 1789-1790): Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2021.1950974

Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1999). How to randomise. BMJ, 319(7211), 703-704. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7211.703

Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1999). Statistics notes. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise? BMJ, 318(7192), 1209. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7192.1209

Arain, M., Campbell, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2010). What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC medical research methodology, 10(1), 67.

Arslan, A., Balıkçı Çiçek, I., & Colak, C. (2019). Open Source Web Based Software for Random Assignment/Allocation Methods in Data Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/IDAP.2019.8875979

Azher, R. A., Wason, J. M., & Grayling, M. J. (2024). A comparison of randomization methods for multi-arm clinical trials. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 16(2), 205-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/19466315.2023.2238645

Baker, J., Johnston, K., Wojtowicz, M., & Wattie, N. (2022). What do we really know about elite athlete development? Limitations and gaps in current understanding. In (Vol. 56, pp. 1331-1332): BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2022-105494

Bärnighausen, T., Oldenburg, C., Tugwell, P., Bommer, C., Ebert, C., Barreto, M., Djimeu, E., Haber, N., Waddington, H., & Rockers, P. (2017). Quasi-experimental study designs series—paper 7: assessing the assumptions. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 89, 53-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.017

Bärnighausen, T., Røttingen, J.-A., Rockers, P., Shemilt, I., & Tugwell, P. (2017). Quasi-experimental study designs series—paper 1: introduction: two historical lineages. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 89, 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.020

Bärnighausen, T., Tugwell, P., Røttingen, J.-A., Shemilt, I., Rockers, P., Geldsetzer, P., Lavis, J., Grimshaw, J., Daniels, K., & Brown, A. (2017). Quasi-experimental study designs series—paper 4: uses and value. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 89, 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.012

Bautista, J. R., Pavlakis, A., & Rajagopal, A. (2018). Bayesian analysis of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 51(7), 637-646. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22928

Beauchamp, M. R. (2024). Registered reports in Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000341

Beltz, A. M., Wright, A. G., Sprague, B. N., & Molenaar, P. C. (2016). Bridging the nomothetic and idiographic approaches to the analysis of clinical data. Assessment, 23(4), 447-458. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116648209

Bhatt, D. L., & Mehta, C. (2016). Adaptive designs for clinical trials. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(1), 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1510061

Bhattacharyya, H., Brahma, D., Pala, S., Wahlang, J., & Marak, M. (2013). Fundamentals of randomized controlled trials. The Internet Journal of Pharmacology, 12(1), 3-23. ispub.com

Birney, E. (2022). Mendelian randomization. Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine, 12(4), a041302. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a041302

Bittl, J. A., & He, Y. (2017). Bayesian analysis: a practical approach to interpret clinical trials and create clinical practice guidelines. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 10(8), e003563. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.003563

Bonotis, P., Chytas, A., Zacharioudakis, G., Karamanidou, C., Koumakis, L., Stamatopoulos, K., & Natsiavas, P. (2021). Randomization of Clinical Trial Participants via an Integrated Web Service. In (Vol. 281). https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI210375

Bowen, D. J., Kreuter, M., Spring, B., Cofta-Woerpel, L., Linnan, L., Weiner, D., Bakken, S., Kaplan, C. P., Squiers, L., & Fabrizio, C. (2009). How we design feasibility studies. American journal of preventive medicine, 36(5), 452-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002

Brown, A. W., Li, P., Bohan Brown, M. M., Kaiser, K. A., Keith, S. W., Oakes, J. M., & Allison, D. B. (2015). Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: designing, analyzing, and reporting cluster randomized controlled trials. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 102(2), 241-248. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.114.105072

Bullock, G. S., Ward, P., Hughes, T., Thigpen, C. A., Cook, C. E., & Shanley, E. (2023). Using randomized controlled trials in the sports medicine and performance environment: is it time to reconsider and think outside the methodological box? journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy, 53(6), 331-334. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.11824

Burgess, D. J. (2017). The research doesn’t always apply: practical solutions to evidence-based training-load monitoring in elite team sports. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(s2), S2-136-S132-141. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0608

Burgess, S., Davey Smith, G., Davies, N. M., Dudbridge, F., Gill, D., Glymour, M. M., Hartwig, F. P., Kutalik, Z., Holmes, M. V., Minelli, C., Morrison, J. V., Pan, W., Relton, C. L., & Theodoratou, E. (2019). Guidelines for performing Mendelian randomization investigations: update for summer 2023. Wellcome Open Res, 4, 186. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15555.3

Burgess, S., Woolf, B., Mason, A. M., Ala-Korpela, M., & Gill, D. (2024). Addressing the credibility crisis in Mendelian randomization. BMC Med, 22(1), 374. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03607-5

Campbell, M. J., Mansournia, M. A., & Lancaster, G. (2020). Methods matter: pilot and feasibility studies in sports medicine. In (Vol. 54, pp. 1309-1310): BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102631

Chow, S.-C., & Chang, M. (2008). Adaptive design methods in clinical trials–a review. Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 3(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-3-11

Colli, A., Pagliaro, L., & Duca, P. (2014). The ethical problem of randomization. Internal and emergency medicine, 9(7), 799-804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-014-1118-z

Copas, A. J., Lewis, J. J., Thompson, J. A., Davey, C., Baio, G., & Hargreaves, J. R. (2015). Designing a stepped wedge trial: three main designs, carry-over effects and randomisation approaches. Trials, 16(1), 352. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0842-7

Coutts, A. J. (2020). Building a bridge between research and practice—the importance of the practical application. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 15(4), 449-449. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2020-0143

Davies, N. M., Holmes, M. V., & Davey Smith, G. (2018). Reading Mendelian randomisation studies: a guide, glossary, and checklist for clinicians. BMJ, 362, k601. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k601

Donner, A., & Klar, N. (2004). Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomization trials. American journal of public health, 94(3), 416-422.

Duignan, C., Doherty, C., Caulfield, B., & Blake, C. (2020). Single-Item Self-Report Measures of Team-Sport Athlete Wellbeing and Their Relationship With Training Load: A Systematic Review. Journal of athletic training, 55(9), 944-953. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0528.19

Dwivedi, S. N. (2025). Understanding of Randomization and its reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials. Central India Journal of Medical Research, 4(01), 7-12.

Edson, R. G. (2017). Methods and Timing of Randomization. In K. M. F. Itani & D. J. Reda (Eds.), Clinical Trials Design in Operative and Non Operative Invasive Procedures (pp. 133-140). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53877-8_15

El-Kotob, R., & Giangregorio, L. M. (2018). Pilot and feasibility studies in exercise, physical activity, or rehabilitation research. Pilot and feasibility studies, 4(1), 137.

Eldridge, S. M., Chan, C. L., Campbell, M. J., Bond, C. M., Hopewell, S., Thabane, L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2016a). CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ, 355, i5239. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5239

Eldridge, S. M., Chan, C. L., Campbell, M. J., Bond, C. M., Hopewell, S., Thabane, L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2016b). CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud, 2, 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-016-0105-8

Ely, F. O., O, J., & Munroe-Chandler, K. J. (2021). How Intervention Research Designs May Broaden the Research-to-Practice Gap in Sport Psychology. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 12(2), 101-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2020.1798573

Emdin, C. A., Khera, A. V., & Kathiresan, S. (2017). Mendelian randomization. JAMA, 318(19), 1925-1926.

Flory, J., & Karlawish, J. (2012). The prompted optional randomization trial: a new design for comparative effectiveness research. American journal of public health, 102(12), e8-e10. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301036 PMC

Fröhlich, M., Emrich, E., Pieter, A., & Stark, R. (2009). Outcome effects and effects sizes in sport sciences. International Journal of Sports Science and Engineering, 3, 175-179. researchgate.net

Geldsetzer, P., & Fawzi, W. (2017). Quasi-experimental study designs series—paper 2: complementary approaches to advancing global health knowledge. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 89, 12-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.015 PubMed

Gill, D., Dib, M.-J., Cronjé, H. T., Karhunen, V., Woolf, B., Gagnon, E., Daghlas, I., Nyberg, M., Drakeman, D., & Burgess, S. (2024). Common pitfalls in drug target Mendelian randomization and how to avoid them. BMC medicine, 22(1), 473. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03700-9

Halperin, I., Pyne, D. B., & Martin, D. T. (2015). Threats to internal validity in exercise science: a review of overlooked confounding variables. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 10(7), 823-829. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2014-0566

Hargreaves, J. R., Copas, A. J., Beard, E., Osrin, D., Lewis, J. J., Davey, C., Thompson, J. A., Baio, G., Fielding, K. L., & Prost, A. (2015). Five questions to consider before conducting a stepped wedge trial. Trials, 16(1), 350. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0841-8

Harriss, D. J., Jones, C., & MacSween, A. (2022). Ethical Standards in Sport and Exercise Science Research: 2022 Update. Int J Sports Med, 43(13), 1065-1070. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1957-2356

Hecksteden, A., Kellner, R., & Donath, L. (2022). Dealing with small samples in football research. Science and Medicine in Football, 6(3), 389-397. https://doi.org/10.1080/24733938.2021.1978106

Hemming, K., Haines, T. P., Chilton, P. J., Girling, A. J., & Lilford, R. J. (2015). The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting. BMJ, 350, h391. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h391

Hemming, K., Taljaard, M., McKenzie, J. E., Hooper, R., Copas, A., Thompson, J. A., Dixon-Woods, M., Aldcroft, A., Doussau, A., Grayling, M., Kristunas, C., Goldstein, C. E., Campbell, M. K., Girling, A., Eldridge, S., Campbell, M. J., Lilford, R. J., Weijer, C., Forbes, A. B., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2018). Reporting of stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 363, k1614. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1614

Hopewell, S., Chan, A. W., Collins, G. S., Hróbjartsson, A., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., Bhandari, N., Butcher, N. J., Campbell, M. K., Chidebe, R. C. W., Elbourne, D., Farmer, A., Fergusson, D. A., Golub, R. M., Goodman, S. N.,…Boutron, I. (2025). CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ, 389, e081123. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-081123

Hróbjartsson, A., Boutron, I., Hopewell, S., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Collins, G. S., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., Bhandari, N., Butcher, N. J., Campbell, M. K., Chidebe, R. C. W., Elbourne, D. R., Farmer, A. J., Fergusson, D. A., Golub, R. M., Goodman, S. N.,…Chan, A. W. (2025). SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials. BMJ, 389, e081660. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-081660

Hussey, M. A., & Hughes, J. P. (2007). Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials, 28(2), 182-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2006.05.007

Impellizzeri, F. M., McCall, A., & Meyer, T. (2019). Registered reports coming soon: our contribution to better science in football research. In (Vol. 3, pp. 87-88): Taylor & Francis.

Kang, M., Ragan, B. G., & Park, J. H. (2008). Issues in outcomes research: an overview of randomization techniques for clinical trials. J Athl Train, 43(2), 215-221. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-43.2.215

Kim, J., & Shin, W. (2014). How to do random allocation (randomization). Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 6(1), 103. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2014.6.1.103

Kinugasa, T. (2013). The application of single-case research designs to study elite athletes’ conditioning: An update. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 25(1), 157-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2012.709578

Kinugasa, T., Cerin, E., & Hooper, S. (2004). Single-subject research designs and data analyses for assessing elite athletes' conditioning. Sports Med, 34(15), 1035-1050. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200434150-00003

Klamert, L., Craike, M., Bedi, G., Kidd, S., Pascoe, M. C., & Parker, A. G. (2024). Underreporting of implementation strategies and barriers in physical activity interventions for young people at risk of problematic substance use: a brief report. Implementation Science Communications, 5(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00578-9

Kunz, R., Vist, G., & Oxman, A. D. (2007). Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(2), Mr000012. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000012.pub2

Lancaster, G. A. (2015). Pilot and feasibility studies come of age! Pilot and feasibility studies, 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2055-5784-1-1

Landy, D. C. (2023). Assessing balance after randomization: keeping our evidence on even ground. In (Vol. 51, pp. 1969-1970): SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.

Li, F., & Wang, R. (2022). Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trials: A Methodological Overview. World Neurosurg, 161, 323-330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2021.10.136

Louro, G., Ferraz, R., Forte, P., Teixeira, J. E., Branquinho, L., & Esteves, D. (2023). The use of control group in the sports science research: the ethical challenge. Motricidade, 19(1), 4-11.

Ma, W., Ye, X., Tu, F., & Hu, F. (2023). carat : An R Package for Covariate-Adaptive Randomization in Clinical Trials. Journal of Statistical Software, 107. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v107.i02

Mahajan, S., Kakkar, S., Vashistha, R., & Vashistha, B. (2023). Chapter 58 - Randomization: fixed or adaptive procedures. In A. E. M. Eltorai, J. A. Bakal, D. W. Kim, & D. E. Wazer (Eds.), Translational Radiation Oncology (pp. 349-352). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-88423-5.00095-9

Marcus, P. M. (2022). Experimental Research Designs. In P. M. Marcus (Ed.), Assessment of Cancer Screening: A Primer (pp. 67-78). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94577-0_6

Ménard, T. (2025). Ethical Challenges of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Mesquida, C., Murphy, J., Lakens, D., & Warne, J. (2022). Replication concerns in sports and exercise science: a narrative review of selected methodological issues in the field. Royal Society open science, 9(12), 220946-220946. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220946

Miola, A. C., Espósito, A. C. C., & Miot, H. A. (2025). Techniques for randomization and allocation for clinical trials. Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, 23, e20240046. https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.202400462

Molenaar, P. C., & Campbell, C. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current directions in psychological science, 18(2), 112-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x

Morgan, B., Hejdenberg, J., Hinrichs-Krapels, S., & Armstrong, D. (2018). Do feasibility studies contribute to, or avoid, waste in research? PLOS ONE, 13(4), e0195951. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195951

Mtande, T. K., Lombard, C., Nair, G., & Rennie, S. (2024). Stakeholders’ experiences of ethical challenges in cluster randomized trials in a limited resource setting: a qualitative analysis. Research ethics, 20(1), 64-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231191247

O'Callaghan, C. (2014). OxMaR: Open Source Free Software for Online Minimization and Randomization for Clinical Trials. PLOS ONE, 9, e110761. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110761

Odgaard-Jensen, J., Vist, G. E., Timmer, A., Kunz, R., Akl, E. A., Schünemann, H., Briel, M., Nordmann, A. J., Pregno, S., & Oxman, A. D. (2011). Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2011(4), Mr000012. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000012.pub3

Owora, A. H., Dawson, J., Gadbury, G., Mestre, L. M., Pavela, G., Mehta, T., Vorland, C. J., Xun, P., & Allison, D. B. (2022). Randomisation can do many things–but it cannot “fail”. Significance, 19(1), 20-23.

Patterson, B. E., Donaldson, A., Cowan, S. M., King, M. G., Barton, C. G., McPhail, S. M., Hagglund, M., White, N. M., Lannin, N. A., & Ackerman, I. N. (2022). Evaluation of an injury prevention programme (Prep-to-Play) in women and girls playing Australian Football: design of a pragmatic, type III, hybrid implementation-effectiveness, stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open, 12(9), e062483. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062483

Preobrazenski, N., McCaig, A., Turner, A., Kushner, M., Pacitti, L., Mendolia, P., MacDonald, B., Storoschuk, K., Bouck, T., Zaza, Y., Lu, S., & Gurd, B. J. (2024). Risk of bias in exercise science: A systematic review of 340 studies. iScience, 27(3), 109010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.109010

Proper, J., Connett, J., & Murray, T. (2021). Alternative models and randomization techniques for Bayesian response-adaptive randomization with binary outcomes. Clinical Trials, 18(4), 417-426. https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745211010139

Prost, A., Binik, A., Abubakar, I., Roy, A., De Allegri, M., Mouchoux, C., Dreischulte, T., Ayles, H., Lewis, J. J., & Osrin, D. (2015). Logistic, ethical, and political dimensions of stepped wedge trials: critical review and case studies. Trials, 16(1), 351. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0837-4

Randomization. (2023). In S. N. Ghaemi (Ed.), A Clinician's Guide to Statistics in Mental Health (2 ed., pp. 21-26). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/9781108887526.006

Robinson, Z. P., Helms, E. R., Trexler, E. T., Steele, J., Hall, M. E., Huang, C. J., & Zourdos, M. C. (2024). N of 1: Optimizing Methodology for the Detection of Individual Response Variation in Resistance Training. Sports Med, 54(8), 1979-1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02050-z

Rosenberger, W. F., & Lachin, J. M. (2015). Randomization in clinical trials: theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.

Ryeznik, Y., & Sverdlov, O. (2024). Incertus.jl -- The Julia Lego Blocks for Randomized Clinical Trial Designs. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.14248

Ryeznik, Y., Sverdlov, O., & Wong, W. (2015). RARtool: A MATLAB Software Package for Designing Response-Adaptive Randomized Clinical Trials with Time-to-Event Outcomes. Journal of Statistical Software, 66. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v066.i01

Saghaei, M. (2011). An overview of randomization and minimization programs for randomized clinical trials. Journal of Medical Signals & Sensors, 1(1), 55-61. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Salway, R., House, D., Kent-Saisch, S., Walker, R., Emm-Collison, L., Porter, A., Lubans, D., Beets, M., de Vocht, F., & Jago, R. (2025). Designing stepped wedge trials to evaluate physical activity interventions in schools: methodological considerations. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-025-01720-z

Sanderson, E., Glymour, M. M., Holmes, M. V., Kang, H., Morrison, J., Munafò, M. R., Palmer, T., Schooling, C. M., Wallace, C., & Zhao, Q. (2022). Mendelian randomization. Nature reviews Methods primers, 2(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-021-00092-5

Sands, W., Cardinale, M., McNeal, J., Murray, S., Sole, C., Reed, J., Apostolopoulos, N., & Stone, M. (2019). Recommendations for measurement and management of an elite athlete. Sports, 7(5), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports7050105

Scheier, L. M. (2010). Methods for Approximating Random Assignment: Regression Discontinuity and Propensity Scores. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition) (pp. 104-110). Elsevier. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01715-2

Senn, S. (2013). Seven myths of randomisation in clinical trials. Statistics in medicine, 32(9), 1439-1450.

Shah, A., & Vingan, P. (2023). Chapter 61 - Randomization: fixed or adaptive procedures. In A. E. M. Eltorai, J. A. Bakal, S. F. DeFroda, & B. D. Owens (Eds.), Translational Sports Medicine (pp. 301-305). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91259-4.00079-5

Sharma, V., & Singh, S. (2023). Intelligent Analytical Randomization of Clinical Trials. In (pp. 232-241). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35641-4_19

Shaw, P. A., Lee Johnson, L., & Borkowf, C. B. (2012). Chapter 20 - Issues in Randomization. In J. I. Gallin & F. P. Ognibene (Eds.), Principles and Practice of Clinical Research (Third Edition) (pp. 243-253). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-382167-6.00020-5

Shi, L., & Li, X. (2024). Some theoretical foundations for the design and analysis of randomized experiments. Journal of Causal Inference, 12(1), 20230067.

Smalheiser, N. R. (2017). Chapter 4 - Experimental Design: Measures, Validity, Sampling, Bias, Randomization, Power. In N. R. Smalheiser (Ed.), Data Literacy (pp. 47-62). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811306-6.00004-X

Smith, G. D., & Ebrahim, S. (2004). Mendelian randomization: prospects, potentials, and limitations. International journal of epidemiology, 33(1), 30-42.

Thompson, J. A., Fielding, K., Hargreaves, J., & Copas, A. (2017). The optimal design of stepped wedge trials with equal allocation to sequences and a comparison to other trial designs. Clinical Trials, 14(6), 639-647. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774517723921

Tu, C., & Benn, E. (2018). RRApp, a robust randomization app, for clinical and translational research. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 1, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2017.310

Tudball, M. J., Smith, G. D., & Zhao, Q. (2022). Almost exact Mendelian randomization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.14035. arxiv.org

Tweedy, S., Dutia, I. M., Cairney, J., & Beckman, E. (2024). Single case experimental design: a rigorous method for addressing inequity and enhancing precision within Para sport and exercise medicine research. Br J Sports Med, 58(21), 1242-1243. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2024-108587

Uschner, D., Schindler, D., Hilgers, R.-D., & Heussen, N. (2018). randomizeR : An R Package for the Assessment and Implementation of Randomization in Clinical Trials. Journal of Statistical Software, 85. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v085.i08

VanderWeele, T. J., Tchetgen, E. J. T., Cornelis, M., & Kraft, P. (2014). Methodological challenges in mendelian randomization. Epidemiology, 25(3), 427-435. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000000081

Vorland, C. J., Brown, A. W., Dawson, J. A., Dickinson, S. L., Golzarri-Arroyo, L., Hannon, B. A., Heo, M., Heymsfield, S. B., Jayawardene, W. P., & Kahathuduwa, C. N. (2021). Errors in the implementation, analysis, and reporting of randomization within obesity and nutrition research: a guide to their avoidance. International Journal of Obesity, 45(11), 2335-2346. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-021-00909-z

Wang, Y., Parpia, S., Couban, R., Wang, Q., Armijo-Olivo, S., Bassler, D., Briel, M., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Gluud, L. L., Keitz, S. A., Letelier, L. M., Ravaud, P., Schulz, K. F., Siemieniuk, R. A. C., Zeraatkar, D., & Guyatt, G. H. (2024). Compelling evidence from meta-epidemiological studies demonstrates overestimation of effects in randomized trials that fail to optimize randomization and blind patients and outcome assessors. J Clin Epidemiol, 165, 111211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.11.001

Wijeysundera, D. N., Austin, P. C., Hux, J. E., Beattie, W. S., & Laupacis, A. (2009). Bayesian statistical inference enhances the interpretation of contemporary randomized controlled trials. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 62(1), 13-21. e15.

Wood, L., Egger, M., Gluud, L. L., Schulz, K. F., Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., Gluud, C., Martin, R. M., Wood, A. J., & Sterne, J. A. (2008). Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ, 336(7644), 601-605. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39465.451748.AD

Yarnell, C. J., Abrams, D., Baldwin, M. R., Brodie, D., Fan, E., Ferguson, N. D., Hua, M., Madahar, P., McAuley, D. F., & Munshi, L. (2021). Clinical trials in critical care: can a Bayesian approach enhance clinical and scientific decision making? The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 9(2), 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30471-9

Zheng, J., Baird, D., Borges, M.-C., Bowden, J., Hemani, G., Haycock, P., Evans, D. M., & Smith, G. D. (2017). Recent developments in Mendelian randomization studies. Current epidemiology reports, 4(4), 330-345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-017-0128-6