{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014285714285714285, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.553956834532374, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Randomized Controlled Trials: Methodological Concepts and Critique

Randomized controlled trials, also known as true experiments or intervention studies, are considered to be the gold standard research design for demonstrating a cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and an outcome. This article will describe key methodological concepts that make the randomized controlled trial this gold standard. Practicing from an evidence-based perspective requires practitioners to be able to critique the strengths and weaknesses of a research study in order to make decisions about adoption of the intervention into one's practice area. Key components to the critique of a randomized controlled trial are defined and the process is illustrated by a critique of Gallo and colleagues article, A Study of Naloxone Effect on Urinary Retention in the Patient Receiving Morphine PCA, published in this issue.