Skip Navigation

International Journal of Epidemiology 2007 36(3):664-665; doi:10.1093/ije/dym088
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sackett, D. L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sackett, D. L
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association. © The Author 2007; all rights reserved.
The online version of this article has been published under an open access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the open access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that: the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal and Oxford University Press are attributed as the original place of publication with the correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Commentary: Measuring the success of blinding in RCTs: don’t, must, can’t or needn’t?

David L Sackett

Trout Research and Education Center at Irish Lake, Canada.

E-mail: sackett@bmts.com

Keywords Randomised trials, Blinding, Bias, Contamination, Co-intervention

Accepted 29 March 2007

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Elsewhere in this issue, Asbjorn Hrobjartsson and his colleagues at the Nordic Cochrane Center present an analysis of the success of blinding in a random sample of entries in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,1 adding to the recent analyses of ‘blinded’ trials from ‘top journals’ published by Dean Fergusson and his colleagues,2 and of trials identified through MEDLINE, Cochrane registries, and ‘high-impact-factor journals’ by Isabelle Boutron and her colleagues3 (No article appeared in all three reviews, and only three articles appeared in two reviews.) The first two teams found that only 2 and 8% of the ‘blinded’ trials . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CMAJHome page
K. B. Filion MSc, P. Belisle MSc, L. Joseph PhD, G. Paradis MD MSc, S. Rinfret MD MSc, and M. J. Eisenberg MD MPH
Smoking cessation trials
Can. Med. Assoc. J., November 4, 2008; 179(10): 1038 - 1038.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin TrialsHome page
V. Hertzberg, M. Chimowitz, M. Lynn, C. Chester, W. Asbury, and G. Cotsonis
Use of dose modification schedules is effective for blinding trials of warfarin: evidence from the WASID study
Clinical Trials, February 1, 2008; 5(1): 23 - 30.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
G. Davey Smith
Big business, big science?
Int. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2008; 37(1): 1 - 3.
[Full Text] [PDF]