Blinding measured: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture.
Blinding measured: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1155/2013/708251
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Park JJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Moroz A;Freed B;Tiedemann L;Bang H;Howell M;Park JJ
背景。研究人员对针灸治疗的可行对照没有达成一致意见，对盲法有效性的评估及其解释也很少见。目的。系统评价针刺试验中盲法（EOB）的有效性；探讨使用EOB定量测量的随机对照试验的结果。数据源。对已发表的评估盲性的假随机对照试验进行系统回顾。研究选择。590项研究被回顾，54项研究（4783名受试者）被纳入。数据提取。从每项研究中提取出猜测自己治疗身份的患者人数。确定了可能影响盲法的变量。合成数据。计算每个研究的致盲指数。根据盲化指标，将研究汇总为9个盲化场景中的一个。探讨个体研究特征与EOB的潜在关联。的局限性。可能存在发表偏倚或报道偏倚。结论。最常见的情况是，受试者认为他们接受了verum针灸，而不管实际接受的治疗是什么，针灸研究中的受试者盲法总体上是令人满意的，61%的研究参与者保持理想的盲法。客观计算的盲法数据可能为进一步解释随机对照试验的结果提供有意义和系统的方法。
Background. There is no agreement among researchers on viable controls for acupuncture treatment, and the assessment of the effectiveness of blinding and its interpretation is rare. Purpose. To systematically assess the effectiveness of blinding (EOB) in reported acupuncture trials; to explore results of RCTs using a quantitative measure of EOB. Data Sources. A systematic review of published sham RCTs that assessed blinding. Study Selection. Five hundred and ninety studies were reviewed, and 54 studies (4783 subjects) were included. Data Extraction. The number of patients who guessed their treatment identity was extracted from each study. Variables with possible influence on blinding were identified. Data Synthesis. The blinding index was calculated for each study. Based on blinding indexes, studies were congregated into one of the nine blinding scenarios. Individual study characteristics were explored for potential association with EOB. Limitations. There is a possibility of publication or reporting bias. Conclusions. The most common scenario was that the subjects believed they received verum acupuncture regardless of the actual treatment received, and overall the subject blinding in the acupuncture studies was satisfactory, with 61% of study participants maintaining ideal blinding. Objectively calculated blinding data may offer meaningful and systematic ways to further interpret the findings of RCTs.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Harris, Richard E.;Zubieta, Jon-Kar;Scott, David J.;Napadow, Vitaly;Gracely, Richard H.;Clauw, Daniel J.
通讯作者：
Clauw, Daniel J.
DOI：
10.1159/000057254
发表时间：
2001-12-01
期刊：
FORSCHENDE KOMPLEMENTARMEDIZIN UND KLASSISCHE NATURHEILKUNDE
影响因子：
--
作者：
Fink, M;Gutenbrunner, C;Karst, M
通讯作者：
Karst, M
DOI：
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.07.053
发表时间：
2008-12-01
影响因子：
6
作者：
Deng, Gary;Rusch, Valerie;Cassiletha, Barrie
通讯作者：
Cassiletha, Barrie
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Lee, Shaun Wen Huey;Liong, Men Long;Krieger, John N.
通讯作者：
Krieger, John N.
DOI：
10.1016/j.cct.2003.10.016
发表时间：
2004-04-01
期刊：
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bang, HJ;Ni, LY;Davis, CE
通讯作者：
Davis, CE