Pair-matching with random allocation in prospective controlled trials: the evolution of a novel design in criminology and medicine, 1926–2021

Is it Time for the Use of Pair-Matching in All Randomized Controlled Trials of Crime and Violence Prevention? A Review of the Research

“…The motivation for the paper grew out of recent works on the history of this evaluation design in criminology and medicine (Welsh et al, 2022), as well as more contemporary interest-also in these fields of study-in the utility of the design coupled with a growing body of research demonstrating its benefits compared to simple RCTs (Imai et al, 2009a(Imai et al, , 2009bAriel and Farrington, 2010;Weisburd and Gill, 2014;Balzer et al, 2105;Chondros et al, 2021). Also important is the larger context of experimental evaluation research.…”

“…Specifically, we searched for and examined studies that focused on the advantages and disadvantages of matched-pair RCTs compared to simple RCTs. Moreover, based on a recent review of historical developments and contemporary uses of matched-pair RCTs spanning almost a full century (Welsh et al, 2022), it was known that the body of evaluation studies that have used this design, albeit increasing in recent decades, is still rather limited.…”

“…Also important to this review is that it draws on the body of knowledge on pair-matching in RCTs from a number of disciplines: criminology; the social sciences more broadly; and medicine and public health. We deemed it necessary to consider the literature in medicine and public health because of the rigorous research on and debate about the subject (see e.g., Imai et al, 2009aImai et al, , 2009bBalzer et al, 2015;Chondros et al, 2021; also see Podolsky et al, 2021;Welsh et al, 2022), as well as the relevance this literature holds for evaluations of interventions with criminological outcomes.…”

The (Harry) Gold standard: angina, suggestion and the path to the ‘double blind’ test and clinical pharmacology. Part 2: the path to the ‘double blind’

“…With the insufficiency of the crossover approach predicated on concern for the long-term storage of alpha tocopherol in the body, and for the impact of changing 'environmental' and 'seasonal' factors in the heparin study, the two studies represented some of the earliest uses of such matched-pair randomisation in the medical literature. 27 While Janet Travell (who would later garner additional fame as the first female Presidential physician, serving as physician to John F. Kennedy), during the planning and early implementation phases of the heparin study, referred to the 'double blind technic' and 'double blind method' to be employed, she and her co-authors referred in the published paper in April 1953 to the 'double blindfold method'. 26,28,29 Terminology was clearly still being stabilised, and Gold, Travell and their colleagues would display some ambiguity concerning what exactly constituted a 'double-blind' study.…”