Although all trials claimed to have performed randomization, only three trials reported the method to generate the allocation sequence (random digits table) and the remaining trials did not give any details of the randomization method.
This finding was consistent with other reviews[17], [18], [19], where many trials claimed that their margin was clinically relevant without any clear details how the clinically acceptable NI margin was chosen.
Importantly, only about half of the trials claimed additional benefit.
In our study, only half of the NI trials claimed such additional benefits.
Similarly, we could not exclude the possibility of publication bias because most of the trials claimed that the tested treatments were effective, though we did not conduct the funnel plot analysis due to the small number of trials.
When the Helsinki Declaration was formulated, Bradford Hill [ 35], an innovator behind clinical trials, claimed that there is no one way of doing clinical trials ethically, and giving detailed advice as if there were will harm both research and ethics.
Only seven publications explicitly stated whether the analyses were defined a priori; four of these trials claimed that the subgroup analyses were pre-specified even though they did not appear in the protocol.
They did try to nail him for past crimes, but he dodged trial, claiming ill-health.
The sociologist of science, Steve Fuller, who testified for the defence at the Dover trial, claims it is not.
The court dodged the question of the constitutionality of his military trial, claiming it had no appellate jurisdiction.
