临床试验中的盲性评估:统计方法综述及盲性评估方案的建议

H. Bang, Stephen P Flaherty, Jafar Kolahi, J. Park
{"title":"临床试验中的盲性评估:统计方法综述及盲性评估方案的建议","authors":"H. Bang, Stephen P Flaherty, Jafar Kolahi, J. Park","doi":"10.3109/10601331003777444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is strong consensus in the clinical trial community that blinding is an important issue in randomized controlled trials. At present grossly incomplete reporting of procedures and the use of any assessment for blinding still prevails. The term ‘double-blind’ has almost become a convention without any checks or balances. Also there is a lack of consensus on quantitative procedures for evaluating the success of blinding in the literature. This article reviews statistical methods of blinding assessment along with software options, and discusses some of the most pressing issues surrounding the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of blinding data. Finally, it proposes a sample blinding assessment protocol to address some of these issues.","PeriodicalId":10446,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","volume":"52 1","pages":"42 - 51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"85","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blinding assessment in clinical trials: A review of statistical methods and a proposal of blinding assessment protocol\",\"authors\":\"H. Bang, Stephen P Flaherty, Jafar Kolahi, J. Park\",\"doi\":\"10.3109/10601331003777444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is strong consensus in the clinical trial community that blinding is an important issue in randomized controlled trials. At present grossly incomplete reporting of procedures and the use of any assessment for blinding still prevails. The term ‘double-blind’ has almost become a convention without any checks or balances. Also there is a lack of consensus on quantitative procedures for evaluating the success of blinding in the literature. This article reviews statistical methods of blinding assessment along with software options, and discusses some of the most pressing issues surrounding the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of blinding data. Finally, it proposes a sample blinding assessment protocol to address some of these issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"42 - 51\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"85\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601331003777444\",\"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 Research and Regulatory Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601331003777444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 85

摘要

临床试验界一致认为,盲法是随机对照试验中的一个重要问题。目前,仍然普遍存在严重不完整的程序报告和使用任何评估来进行盲法。“双盲”一词几乎已经成为一种没有任何制衡的惯例。此外,在文献中对评估盲法成功的定量程序缺乏共识。本文回顾了盲法评估的统计方法以及软件选项,并讨论了一些围绕盲法数据的获取、解释和报告的最紧迫的问题。最后,提出了一个样本盲法评估方案来解决其中的一些问题。
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 assessment in clinical trials: A review of statistical methods and a proposal of blinding assessment protocol
There is strong consensus in the clinical trial community that blinding is an important issue in randomized controlled trials. At present grossly incomplete reporting of procedures and the use of any assessment for blinding still prevails. The term ‘double-blind’ has almost become a convention without any checks or balances. Also there is a lack of consensus on quantitative procedures for evaluating the success of blinding in the literature. This article reviews statistical methods of blinding assessment along with software options, and discusses some of the most pressing issues surrounding the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of blinding data. Finally, it proposes a sample blinding assessment protocol to address some of these issues.
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
Changes to protocol in the regulation of adverse drug reactions – historical and current European view Policy and regulations in light of the human body as a ‘superorganism’ containing multiple, intertwined symbiotic relationships Community pharmacists’ knowledge and perceptions on risk management plans in the Southern Region of Portugal Increasing the odds of effective drug development: Elevating regulatory affairs professionals to strategic partners Current regulatory challenges and approaches in the registration of herbal drugs in Europe
×
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