Randomization in clinical trials in orthodontics: its significance in research design and methods to achieve it

Randomization is a key step in reducing selection bias during the treatment allocation phase in randomized clinical trials. The process of randomization follows specific steps, which include generation of the randomization list, allocation concealment, and implementation of randomization. The phenomenon in the dental and orthodontic literature of characterizing treatment allocation as random is frequent; however, often the randomization procedures followed are not appropriate. Randomization methods assign, at random, treatment to the trial arms without foreknowledge of allocation by either the participants or the investigators thus reducing selection bias. Randomization entails generation of random allocation, allocation concealment, and the actual methodology of implementing treatment allocation randomly and unpredictably. Most popular randomization methods include some form of restricted and/or stratified randomization. This article introduces the reasons, which make randomization an integral part of solid clinical trial methodology, and presents the main randomization schemes applicable to clinical trials in orthodontics.

Functionalized Adamantane Tectons Used in the Design of Mixed-Ligand Copper(II) 1,2,4-Triazolyl/Carboxylate Metal–Organic Frameworks

Bistriazoles, 1,3-bis(1,2,4-triazol-4-yl)propane (tr2pr) and 1,3-bis(1,2,4-triazol-4-yl)adamantane (tr2ad), were examined in combination with the rigid tetratopic 1,3,5,7-adamantanetetracarboxylic acid (H4-adtc) platform for the construction of neutral heteroleptic copper(II) metal−organic frameworks. Two coordination polymers, [{Cu4(OH)2(H2O)2}{Cu4(OH)2}(tr2pr)2(H-adtc)4]·2H2O (1) and [Cu4(OH)2(tr2ad)2(H-adtc)2(H2O)2]·3H2O (2), were synthesized and structurally characterized. In complexes 1 and 2, the N1,N2-1,2,4-triazolyl (tr) and μ3-OH− groups serve as complementary bridges between adjacent metal centers supporting the tetranuclear dihydroxo clusters. The structure of 1 represents a unique association of two different kinds of centrosymmetrical {Cu4(OH)2} units in a tight 3D framework, while in compound 2, another configuration type of acentric tetranuclear metal clusters is organized in a layered 3,6-hexagonal motif. In both cases, the {Cu4(OH)2} secondary building block and trideprotonated carboxylate H-adtc3− can be viewed as covalently bound six- and three-connected nodes that define the net topology. The tr ligands, showing μ3- or μ4-binding patterns, introduce additional integrating links between the neighboring {Cu4(OH)2} fragments. A variable-temperature magnetic susceptibility study of 2 demonstrates strong antiferromagnetic intracluster coupling (J1 = −109 cm−1 and J2 = −21 cm−1), which combines for the bulk phase with a weak antiferromagnetic intercluster interaction (zj = −2.5 cm−1).

Cluster randomized clinical trials in orthodontics: design, analysis and reporting issues

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) use as the unit of randomization clusters, which are usually defined as a collection of individuals sharing some common characteristics. Common examples of clusters include entire dental practices, hospitals, schools, school classes, villages, and towns. Additionally, several measurements (repeated measurements) taken on the same individual at different time points are also considered to be clusters. In dentistry, CRTs are applicable as patients may be treated as clusters containing several individual teeth. CRTs require certain methodological procedures during sample calculation, randomization, data analysis, and reporting, which are often ignored in dental research publications. In general, due to similarity of the observations within clusters, each individual within a cluster provides less information compared with an individual in a non-clustered trial. Therefore, clustered designs require larger sample sizes compared with non-clustered randomized designs, and special statistical analyses that account for the fact that observations within clusters are correlated. It is the purpose of this article to highlight with relevant examples the important methodological characteristics of cluster randomized designs as they may be applied in orthodontics and to explain the problems that may arise if clustered observations are erroneously treated and analysed as independent (non-clustered).

Chiral Templating Activity of Tris(bipyridine)ruthenium(II) Cation in the Design of Three-Dimensional (3D) Optically Active Oxalate-Bridged {[Ru(bpy) 3 ][Cu 2 x Ni 2(1 - x ) (C 2 O 4 ) 3 ]} n (0 ≤ x ≤ 1; bpy = 2,2‘-bipyridine): Structural, Optical, and Magnetic Studies

Three-dimensional oxalate-based {[Ru(bpy)3][Cu2xNi2(1-x)(ox)3]}n (0≤ x ≤ 1, ox = C2O42-, bpy = 2,2‘bipyridine) were synthesized. The structure was determined for x = 1 by X-ray diffraction on single crystal. The compound crystallizes in the cubic space group P4132. It shows a three-dimensional 10-gon 3-connected (10,3) anionic network where copper(II) has an unusual tris(bischelated) environment. X-ray powder diffraction patterns and their Rietveld refinement show that all the compounds along the series are isostructural and single-phased. According to X-ray absorption spectroscopy, copper(II) and nickel(II) have an octahedral environment, respectively elongated and trigonally distorted. As shown by natural circular dichroism, the optically active forms of {[Ru(bpy)3][CuxNi2(1-x)(ox)3]}n are obtained starting from resolved Δ- or Λ-[Ru(bpy)3]2+. The Curie−Weiss temperatures range between −55 (x = 1) and −150 K (x = 0). The antiferromagnetic exchange interaction thus decreases when the copper contents increases in agreement with the crystallographic structure of the compounds and the electronic structure of the metal ions. At low temperature, the compounds exhibit complex long-range ordered magnetic behavior.