Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother?

Kenneth F. Schulz

37 citations0/0 files storedBMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother?The scientific community's quest for unbiased research received a strong boost from a recent policy amendment on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this journal.Henceforth, the status of allocation concealment will be clearly indicated in the abstracts along with that of blinding, so readers will have additional information by which to judge the internal validity of trials.In this editorial, I address the background of and rationale for these enhancements.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 37 citations exist upstream.

References

1995Empirical Evidence of Bias 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement 1996Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials 1996Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews 1994Assessing the Quality of Randomization From Reports of Controlled Trials Published in Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals 1982Reporting on Methods in Clinical Trials

Cited by

2008The effect of bias on the magnitude of clinical outcomes in periodontology: a pilot study

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.