© 2000 Evidence-Based Medicine
Incorporating allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials
Editor
While we are happy to take credit for incorporating more information on blinding and concealment in our abstracts, the credit for stimulating us to do so belongs elsewhere. First, Ken Schulz and others have shown us that randomisation, blinding, and concealment of allocation make a difference to the accuracy of trial reports. Second, Phillip Devereaux and others have taken us to task for failing to report these important features of clinical trials. Readers will find that abstracts of trials now include whether the randomisation was concealed from those responsible for entering patients into trials and who was blinded to treatment allocation during the trial. This information will be provided under the "Design" heading in abstracts whenever it is possible to obtain it from the study report or, failing that, directly from the investigators.
Unfortunately, our experience to date shows that it is not always possible to acquire an unequivocal answer
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Chalmers, I.
(2001). Comparing like with like: some historical milestones in the evolution of methods to create unbiased comparison groups in therapeutic experiments. Int J Epidemiol
30: 1156-1164
[Abstract] [Full Text]
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
