The reporting of blinding in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: where do we stand?

↓ Direkt till sidans innehåll
↓ Direkt till sidans sekundära innehåll (sidomenyn)

Sökning: WFRF:(Bondemark Lars) > The reporting of bl...

LIBRIS Formathandbok (Information om MARC21)

Fältnamn	Indikatorer	Metadata
000		03248naa a2200301 4500
001		oai:DiVA.org:mau-6038
003		SwePub
008		200228s2019 \| \|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|\|000 \|\|eng\|
024	7	a https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-60382 URI
024	7	a https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjy0212 DOI
040		a (SwePub)mau
041		a engb eng
042		9 SwePub
072	7	a ref2 swepub-contenttype
072	7	a art2 swepub-publicationtype
100	1	a Abdulraheem, Salemu Malmö universitet,Odontologiska fakulteten (OD),Ministry of Health, Kuwait4 aut0 (Swepub:mau)ae1168
245	1 0	a The reporting of blinding in orthodontic randomized controlled trials :b where do we stand?
264		c 2018-04-24
264	1	b Oxford Academic,c 2019
338		a print2 rdacarrier
520		a Objective: To analyse in 10 orthodontic journals how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed 'single-', 'double-', 'triple-', or 'outcome assessors blinding' and to evaluate, from the number of RCTs that did not conduct blinding, how many could actually have achieved it. Material and methods: Randomized controlled trials published in 10 orthodontic journals between 1 September 2012 and 28 February 2018 were included. A search was performed in PubMed and conducted for publication type 'randomized controlled trial' for each journal. Two reviewers independently analysed each RCT and registered that blinding was performed and included which specific type. It was also evaluated whether misclassifications of blinding items occurred and whether it was possible to achieve blinding among the RCTs that did not perform blinding. Results: After applying the inclusion criteria, 203 RCTs were assessed, and 61.6 per cent of them had used blinding, with the main type being 'outcome assessors blinding' (40.4%) followed by 'single-blinding' (15.3%), 'double-blinding' (2.5%), and 'triple-blinding' (3.4%). In 38.4 per cent of the trials, no blinding was performed; however, 79.4 per cent of them could have achieved blinding. Fifteen RCTs (7.3%) misclassified the blinding in relation to single-, double-, or triple-blinding. Journals followed the CONSORT (AJODO, EJO, JO, OCR) published together significantly more RCTs that performed blinding than journals not following the CONSORT. Conclusions: Blinding of outcome assessors was the most frequent type, as orthodontic trials are often of intervention design and thereby difficult to mask for patients and trial staff. The misclassifications of blinding items may indicate suboptimal knowledge among researchers and peer-reviewers regarding the definitions for diverse blinding types.
650	7	a MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAPx Klinisk medicinx Odontologi0 (SwePub)302162 hsv//swe
650	7	a MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCESx Clinical Medicinex Dentistry0 (SwePub)302162 hsv//eng
700	1	a Bondemark, Larsu Malmö universitet,Odontologiska fakulteten (OD)4 aut0 (Swepub:mau)odlabo
710	2	a Malmö universitetb Odontologiska fakulteten (OD)4 org
773	0	t European Journal of Orthodonticsd : Oxford Academicg 41:1, s. 54-58q 41:1<54-58x 0141-5387x 1460-2210
856	4 8	u https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6038
856	4 8	u https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjy021

Hitta via bibliotek

European Journal of Orthodontics (Sök värdpublikationen i LIBRIS)

Till lärosätets databas

Hitta mer i SwePub

Av författaren/redakt...: Abdulraheem, Sal ...; Bondemark, Lars

Om ämnet

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP: MEDICIN OCH HÄLS ...; och Klinisk medicin; och Odontologi

Artiklar i publikationen: European Journal ...

Av lärosätet: Malmö universitet

Sök utanför SwePub

Sök vidare i:: Google; Google Book Search; Google Scholar

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

LIBRIS.kb.se