针灸研究中的盲法:使用假针灸对照的疼痛随机对照试验的系统回顾

Kien Vinh Trinh
{"title":"针灸研究中的盲法:使用假针灸对照的疼痛随机对照试验的系统回顾","authors":"Kien Vinh Trinh","doi":"10.1016/S1461-1449(03)00026-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><em>Objective</em><span>: To study the various methods and levels of blinding in acupuncture research. </span><em>Data sources</em>: Reference lists of the most recent systematic review of acupuncture on pain, systematic search of MEDLINE from 1966 to August 2000, CINAHL from 1982 to August 2000, and HealthSTAR from 1975 to August 2000.</p><p><em>Study selection</em>: Randomized studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture in painful conditions using a blinded design.</p><p><em>Data extraction</em><span>: The hard copy of each of the eligible studies available was reviewed. The following information was extracted: name of first author, publication year, study design, blinding testing, treatment sham group received, and the outcome measures.</span></p><p><em>Data synthesis</em>: There were 19 studies identified. They were described as ‘double blinded’ by the authors, referring to blinding of patients and evaluators. Sixteen studies did not perform any blinding testing after the treatments were over. Only three studies provided information that the blinding of patients was successful. These three studies used different questionnaires to assess the success of blinding. There was no study that evaluated the success of blinding of treatment evaluators. Also, no study attempted blinding of the treating acupuncturists.</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: Proper blinding of patients and evaluators is possible in acupuncture research and many different techniques of proper blinding exist. Assessment of blinding is a critical aspect of any sham or placebo controlled trial and should be routinely incorporated into the design of such trials of acupuncture.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100265,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 71-77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1461-1449(03)00026-4","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blinding in acupuncture research: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials for pain using a sham acupuncture control\",\"authors\":\"Kien Vinh Trinh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1461-1449(03)00026-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><em>Objective</em><span>: To study the various methods and levels of blinding in acupuncture research. </span><em>Data sources</em>: Reference lists of the most recent systematic review of acupuncture on pain, systematic search of MEDLINE from 1966 to August 2000, CINAHL from 1982 to August 2000, and HealthSTAR from 1975 to August 2000.</p><p><em>Study selection</em>: Randomized studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture in painful conditions using a blinded design.</p><p><em>Data extraction</em><span>: The hard copy of each of the eligible studies available was reviewed. The following information was extracted: name of first author, publication year, study design, blinding testing, treatment sham group received, and the outcome measures.</span></p><p><em>Data synthesis</em>: There were 19 studies identified. They were described as ‘double blinded’ by the authors, referring to blinding of patients and evaluators. Sixteen studies did not perform any blinding testing after the treatments were over. Only three studies provided information that the blinding of patients was successful. These three studies used different questionnaires to assess the success of blinding. There was no study that evaluated the success of blinding of treatment evaluators. Also, no study attempted blinding of the treating acupuncturists.</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: Proper blinding of patients and evaluators is possible in acupuncture research and many different techniques of proper blinding exist. Assessment of blinding is a critical aspect of any sham or placebo controlled trial and should be routinely incorporated into the design of such trials of acupuncture.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 71-77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1461-1449(03)00026-4\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1461144903000264\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1461144903000264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

目的:探讨针刺研究中不同的盲法方法和盲法水平。资料来源:针灸治疗疼痛最新系统综述参考文献列表,1966 - 2000年8月MEDLINE系统检索,1982 - 2000年8月CINAHL系统检索,1975 - 2000年8月HealthSTAR系统检索。研究选择:采用盲法设计评估针刺治疗疼痛的有效性,纳入随机研究。资料提取:对每一项符合条件的现有研究的硬拷贝进行了审查。提取以下信息:第一作者姓名、发表年份、研究设计、盲法检验、接受治疗的假组和结果测量。数据综合:共确定了19项研究。他们被作者描述为“双盲”,指的是患者和评估人员的盲法。16项研究在治疗结束后没有进行任何盲法测试。只有三项研究提供的信息表明患者的盲法是成功的。这三项研究使用不同的问卷来评估盲法的成功与否。没有研究评估治疗评估者的盲法是否成功。同样,也没有研究试图对治疗针灸师进行盲法。结论:在针灸研究中,对患者和评估者进行适当的盲法是可能的,并且存在多种不同的适当盲法技术。盲性评估是任何假药或安慰剂对照试验的一个关键方面,应常规纳入此类针灸试验的设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Blinding in acupuncture research: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials for pain using a sham acupuncture control

Objective: To study the various methods and levels of blinding in acupuncture research. Data sources: Reference lists of the most recent systematic review of acupuncture on pain, systematic search of MEDLINE from 1966 to August 2000, CINAHL from 1982 to August 2000, and HealthSTAR from 1975 to August 2000.

Study selection: Randomized studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture in painful conditions using a blinded design.

Data extraction: The hard copy of each of the eligible studies available was reviewed. The following information was extracted: name of first author, publication year, study design, blinding testing, treatment sham group received, and the outcome measures.

Data synthesis: There were 19 studies identified. They were described as ‘double blinded’ by the authors, referring to blinding of patients and evaluators. Sixteen studies did not perform any blinding testing after the treatments were over. Only three studies provided information that the blinding of patients was successful. These three studies used different questionnaires to assess the success of blinding. There was no study that evaluated the success of blinding of treatment evaluators. Also, no study attempted blinding of the treating acupuncturists.

Conclusions: Proper blinding of patients and evaluators is possible in acupuncture research and many different techniques of proper blinding exist. Assessment of blinding is a critical aspect of any sham or placebo controlled trial and should be routinely incorporated into the design of such trials of acupuncture.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial board A research agenda for the acupuncture community Treating hiccups with differential point prescription Influence of akupoints of principal meridians on a skeletal musculation of the person Body surface stimulation and rectal motility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1