Reporting methods of blinding in randomized trials assessing nonpharmacological treatments
- PMID: 17311468
- PMCID: PMC1800311
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040061
Reporting methods of blinding in randomized trials assessing nonpharmacological treatments
Abstract
Background: Blinding is a cornerstone of treatment evaluation. Blinding is more difficult to obtain in trials assessing nonpharmacological treatment and frequently relies on "creative" (nonstandard) methods. The purpose of this study was to systematically describe the strategies used to obtain blinding in a sample of randomized controlled trials of nonpharmacological treatment.
Methods and findings: We systematically searched in Medline and the Cochrane Methodology Register for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing nonpharmacological treatment with blinding, published during 2004 in high-impact-factor journals. Data were extracted using a standardized extraction form. We identified 145 articles, with the method of blinding described in 123 of the reports. Methods of blinding of participants and/or health care providers and/or other caregivers concerned mainly use of sham procedures such as simulation of surgical procedures, similar attention-control interventions, or a placebo with a different mode of administration for rehabilitation or psychotherapy. Trials assessing devices reported various placebo interventions such as use of sham prosthesis, identical apparatus (e.g., identical but inactivated machine or use of activated machine with a barrier to block the treatment), or simulation of using a device. Blinding participants to the study hypothesis was also an important method of blinding. The methods reported for blinding outcome assessors relied mainly on centralized assessment of paraclinical examinations, clinical examinations (i.e., use of video, audiotape, photography), or adjudications of clinical events.
Conclusions: This study classifies blinding methods and provides a detailed description of methods that could overcome some barriers of blinding in clinical trials assessing nonpharmacological treatment, and provides information for readers assessing the quality of results of such trials.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures




Similar articles
-
A review of blinding in randomized controlled trials found results inconsistent and questionable.J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Dec;58(12):1220-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.04.006. Epub 2005 Sep 30. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005. PMID: 16291465 Review.
-
Who is blinded in randomized clinical trials? A study of 200 trials and a survey of authors.Clin Trials. 2006;3(4):360-5. doi: 10.1177/1740774506069153. Clin Trials. 2006. PMID: 17060210 Review.
-
Turning a blind eye: the success of blinding reported in a random sample of randomised, placebo controlled trials.BMJ. 2004 Feb 21;328(7437):432. doi: 10.1136/bmj.37952.631667.EE. Epub 2004 Jan 22. BMJ. 2004. PMID: 14761905 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The quality of reporting of orthopaedic randomized trials with use of a checklist for nonpharmacological therapies.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Sep;89(9):1970-8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01591. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007. PMID: 17768194
-
Blinded trials taken to the test: an analysis of randomized clinical trials that report tests for the success of blinding.Int J Epidemiol. 2007 Jun;36(3):654-63. doi: 10.1093/ije/dym020. Epub 2007 Apr 17. Int J Epidemiol. 2007. PMID: 17440024
Cited by
-
Participant informed consent in cluster randomized trials: review.PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40436. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040436. Epub 2012 Jul 6. PLoS One. 2012. PMID: 22792319 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Good Scientific Practice and Ethics in Sports and Exercise Science: A Brief and Comprehensive Hands-on Appraisal for Sports Research.Sports (Basel). 2023 Feb 16;11(2):47. doi: 10.3390/sports11020047. Sports (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36828332 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The effectiveness of a skin care program for the prevention of contact dermatitis in health care workers (the Healthy Hands Project): study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.Trials. 2017 Feb 28;18(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1803-0. Trials. 2017. PMID: 28245835 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effects of person-centred care via telephone on self-efficacy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial.Nurs Open. 2021 Mar;8(2):927-935. doi: 10.1002/nop2.701. Epub 2020 Nov 24. Nurs Open. 2021. PMID: 33570304 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Interventions to Foster Mental Health and Reintegration in Individuals Who Are Unemployed: Systematic Review.JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2025 May 5;11:e65698. doi: 10.2196/65698. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2025. PMID: 40324176 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Gluud LL. Bias in clinical intervention research. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:493–501. - PubMed
-
- Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408–412. - PubMed
-
- Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:254–259. - PubMed
-
- Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Lacchetti C, et al. Physician interpretations and textbook definitions of blinding terminology in randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2001;285:2000–2003. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical