Random guess and wishful thinking are the best blinding scenarios
Author:
Open Access
- 1 August 2016
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
- Vol. 3, 117-121
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
Funding Information
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- National Institutes of Health (UL1 TR000002)
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- A New Framework for Interpreting the Outcomes of Imperfectly Blinded Controlled Clinical TrialsPLOS ONE, 2012
- Randomized treatment-belief trialsContemporary Clinical Trials, 2012
- Blinding assessment in clinical trials: A review of statistical methods and a proposal of blinding assessment protocolClinical Research and Regulatory Affairs, 2010
- Towards a proposal for assessment of blinding success in clinical trials: up‐to‐date reviewCommunity Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, 2009
- Blinding in clinical trials, time to do it betterComplementary Therapies in Medicine, 2008
- Use of dose modification schedules is effective for blinding trials of warfarin: evidence from the WASID studyClinical Trials, 2008
- Double-blindness protects scientific validityJournal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 2008
- Double-blindness protects scientific validityJournal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 2008
- Reporting Methods of Blinding in Randomized Trials Assessing Nonpharmacological TreatmentsPLOS Medicine, 2007
- Influence of Adherence to Treatment and Response of Cholesterol on Mortality in the Coronary Drug ProjectNew England Journal of Medicine, 1980