Linear regression is arguably the most fundamental statistical model;
however, the validity of its use in randomized clinical trials, despite being
common practice, has never been crystal clear, particularly when stratified or
covariate-adaptive randomization is used. In this paper, we investigate several
of the most intuitive and commonly used regression models for estimating and
inferring the treatment effect in randomized clinical trials. By allowing the
regression model to be arbitrarily misspecified, we demonstrate that all these
regression-based estimators robustly estimate the treatment effect, albeit with
possibly different efficiency. We also propose consistent non-parametric
variance estimators and compare their performances to those of the model-based
variance estimators that are readily available in standard statistical
software. Based on the results and taking into account both theoretical
efficiency and practical feasibility, we make recommendations for the effective
use of regression under various scenarios. For equal allocation, it suffices to
use the regression adjustment for the stratum covariates and additional
baseline covariates, if available, with the usual ordinary-least-squares
variance estimator. For unequal allocation, regression with
treatment-by-covariate interactions should be used, together with our proposed
variance estimators. These recommendations apply to simple and stratified
randomization, and minimization, among others. We hope this work helps to
clarify and promote the usage of regression in randomized clinical trials