» Articles » PMID: 23236350

A New Framework for Interpreting the Outcomes of Imperfectly Blinded Controlled Clinical Trials

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2012 Dec 14
PMID 23236350
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

It is well known that the outcome of an intervention is affected both by the inherent effects of the intervention and the patient's expectations. For this reason in comparative clinical trials an effort is made to conceal the nature of the administered intervention from the participants in the trial i.e. to blind the trial. Yet, in practice perfect blinding is impossible to ensure or even verify post hoc. The current clinical standard is to follow up the trial with an auxiliary questionnaire, which allows trial participants to express in closed form their belief concerning the intervention, i.e. trial group assignment (treatment or control). Auxiliary questionnaire responses are then used to compute the extent of blinding in the trial in the form of a blinding index. If the estimated extent of blinding exceeds a particular threshold the trial is deemed sufficiently blinded; otherwise, the strength of evidence of the trial is brought into question. This may necessitate that the trial is repeated. In this paper we make several contributions. Firstly, we identify a series of problems of the aforesaid clinical practice and discuss them in context of the most commonly used blinding indexes. Secondly, we formulate a novel approach for handling imperfectly blinded trials. We adopt a feedback questionnaire of the same form as that which is currently in use, but interpret the collected data using a novel statistical method, significantly different from that proposed in the previous work. Unlike the previously proposed approaches, our method is void of any ad hoc free parameters and robust to small changes in the participants' feedback responses. Our method also does not discard any data and is not predicated on any strong assumptions used to interpret participants' feedback. The key idea behind the present method is that it is meaningful to compare only the corresponding treatment and control participant sub-groups, that is, sub-groups matched by their auxiliary responses. A series of experiments on simulated trials is used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach and its superiority over those currently in use.

Citing Articles

A systemic challenge in dietetics: Methodological inadequacies, erroneous claims, and misleadinginterpretations, and transparency of post-publication scrutiny.

Arandjelovic O Nutr Health. 2022; 28(3):319-323.

PMID: 35414320 PMC: 9388950. DOI: 10.1177/02601060221094126.


Blinding, sham, and treatment effects in randomized controlled trials for back pain in 2000-2019: A review and meta-analytic approach.

Freed B, Williams B, Situ X, Landsman V, Kim J, Moroz A Clin Trials. 2021; 18(3):361-370.

PMID: 33478258 PMC: 8172416. DOI: 10.1177/1740774520984870.


Double-blinding of an acupuncture randomized controlled trial optimized with clinical translational science award resources.

Steffen A, Burke L, Pauls H, Suarez M, Yao Y, Kobak W Clin Trials. 2020; 17(5):545-551.

PMID: 32650673 PMC: 7529889. DOI: 10.1177/1740774520934910.


A principled machine learning framework improves accuracy of stage II colorectal cancer prognosis.

Dimitriou N, Arandjelovic O, Harrison D, Caie P NPJ Digit Med. 2019; 1:52.

PMID: 31304331 PMC: 6550189. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-018-0057-x.


A more principled use of the -value? Not so fast: a critique of Colquhoun's argument.

Arandjelovic O R Soc Open Sci. 2019; 6(5):181519.

PMID: 31218019 PMC: 6549987. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.181519.


References
1.
Mayberg H, Silva J, Brannan S, Tekell J, Mahurin R, McGinnis S . The functional neuroanatomy of the placebo effect. Am J Psychiatry. 2002; 159(5):728-37. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.159.5.728. View

2.
BEECHER H . The powerful placebo. J Am Med Assoc. 1955; 159(17):1602-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1955.02960340022006. View

3.
Karakitsos D, Papanikolaou J, Karabinis A, Alalawi R, Wachtel M, Jumper C . Acute effect of sildenafil on central hemodynamics in mechanically ventilated patients with WHO group III pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular failure necessitating administration of dobutamine. Int J Cardiol. 2012; 167(3):848-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.02.006. View

4.
James K, Bloch D, Lee K, Kraemer H, Fuller R . An index for assessing blindness in a multi-centre clinical trial: disulfiram for alcohol cessation--a VA cooperative study. Stat Med. 1996; 15(13):1421-34. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960715)15:13<1421::AID-SIM266>3.0.CO;2-H. View

5.
Berger V . Quantifying the magnitude of baseline covariate imbalances resulting from selection bias in randomized clinical trials. Biom J. 2006; 47(2):119-27. DOI: 10.1002/bimj.200410106. View