Cargando…

Methods of Blinding in Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Assessing Pharmacologic Treatments: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Blinding is a cornerstone of therapeutic evaluation because lack of blinding can bias treatment effect estimates. An inventory of the blinding methods would help trialists conduct high-quality clinical trials and readers appraise the quality of results of published trials. We aimed to sy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Boutron, Isabelle, Estellat, Candice, Guittet, Lydia, Dechartres, Agnes, Sackett, David L, Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn, Ravaud, Philippe
Formato:	Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	Public Library of Science 2006
Materias:	Research Article
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1626553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17076559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030425

Ejemplares similares

Reporting Methods of Blinding in Randomized Trials Assessing Nonpharmacological Treatments
por: Boutron, Isabelle, et al.
Publicado: (2007)

Applicability and generalisability of the results of systematic reviews to public health practice and policy: a systematic review
por: Ahmad, Nizar, et al.
Publicado: (2010)

Geographical Representativeness of Published and Ongoing Randomized Controlled Trials. The Example of: Tobacco Consumption and HIV Infection
por: Ahmad, Nizar, et al.
Publicado: (2011)

Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study
por: Dechartres, Agnes, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
por: Yordanov, Youri, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Exclusion of patients with concomitant chronic conditions in ongoing randomised controlled trials targeting 10 common chronic conditions and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: a systematic review of registration details
por: Buffel du Vaure, Céline, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Association between trial registration and treatment effect estimates: a meta-epidemiological study
por: Dechartres, Agnès, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Impact of single centre status on estimates of intervention effects in trials with continuous outcomes: meta-epidemiological study
por: Bafeta, Aïda, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Timing and Completeness of Trial Results Posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and Published in Journals
por: Riveros, Carolina, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Public availability of results of observational studies evaluating an intervention registered at ClinicalTrials.gov
por: Baudart, Marie, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

The matching quality of experimental and control interventions in blinded pharmacological randomised clinical trials: a methodological systematic review
por: Bello, Segun, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration
por: Turner, Lucy, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

A priori postulated and real power in cluster randomized trials: mind the gap
por: Guittet, Lydia, et al.
Publicado: (2005)

Knee Arthroplasty: Disabilities in Comparison to the General Population and to Hip Arthroplasty Using a French National Longitudinal Survey
por: Dechartres, Agnes, et al.
Publicado: (2008)

Planning a cluster randomized trial with unequal cluster sizes: practical issues involving continuous outcomes
por: Guittet, Lydia, et al.
Publicado: (2006)

Avoidable waste of research related to outcome planning and reporting in clinical trials
por: Yordanov, Youri, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Patient-important outcomes in systematic reviews: Poor quality of evidence
por: Yordanov, Youri, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

COVID-19 trials were not more likely to report intent to share individual data than non-COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov
por: Ramdjee, Bruno, et al.
Publicado: (2023)

Comparison of Treatment Effect Estimates for Pharmacological Randomized Controlled Trials Enrolling Older Adults Only and Those including Adults: A Meta-Epidemiological Study
por: Seegers, Valérie, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Better prioritization to increase research value and decrease waste
por: Dechartres, Agnes, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials: meta-epidemiological study
por: Moustgaard, Helene, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Avoidable waste related to inadequate methods and incomplete reporting of interventions: a systematic review of randomized trials performed in Sub-Saharan Africa
por: Ndounga Diakou, Lee Aymar, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Reporting of analyses from randomized controlled trials with multiple arms: a systematic review
por: Baron, Gabriel, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Correction to: Avoidable waste related to inadequate methods and incomplete reporting of interventions: a systematic review of randomized trials performed in Sub-Saharan Africa
por: Ndounga Diakou, Lee Aymar, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Quality of Reporting of Bioequivalence Trials Comparing Generic to Brand Name Drugs: A Methodological Systematic Review
por: van der Meersch, Amélie, et al.
Publicado: (2011)

Outcomes in Registered, Ongoing Randomized Controlled Trials of Patient Education
por: Pino, Cécile, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Inadequate description of educational interventions in ongoing randomized controlled trials
por: Pino, Cécile, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Meta-analyses including non-randomized studies of therapeutic interventions: a methodological review
por: Faber, Timor, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Disagreements in risk of bias assessment for randomised controlled trials included in more than one Cochrane systematic reviews: a research on research study using cross-sectional design
por: Bertizzolo, Lorenzo, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Impact of adding a limitations section to abstracts of systematic reviews on readers’ interpretation: a randomized controlled trial
por: Yavchitz, Amélie, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Classification and prevalence of spin in abstracts of non-randomized studies evaluating an intervention
por: Lazarus, Clément, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Incorporation of assessments of risk of bias of primary studies in systematic reviews of randomised trials: a cross-sectional study
por: Hopewell, Sally, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews
por: Jørgensen, Lars, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Assessment of transparency and selective reporting of interventional trials studying colorectal cancer
por: Pellat, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Feasibility of individual patient data meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery
por: Villain, Benoit, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Comparison of Estimates between Cohort and Case–Control Studies in Meta-Analyses of Therapeutic Interventions: A Meta-Epidemiological Study
por: Lanza, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Availability of results of interventional studies assessing colorectal cancer from 2013 to 2020
por: Pellat, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Reporting of statistically significant results at ClinicalTrials.gov for completed superiority randomized controlled trials
por: Dechartres, Agnes, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Three randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of “spin” in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments on patients’/caregivers’ interpretation of treatment benefit
por: Boutron, Isabelle, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Correction to: Three randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of “spin” in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments on patients’/caregivers’ interpretation of treatment benefit
por: Boutron, Isabelle, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_qsel5tbhp0ciha1i98hfmcas37