Literature DB >> 15911463

Can keeping clinical trial participants blind to their study treatment adversely affect subsequent care?

Joseph C Blader1.   

Abstract

Subjects in controlled clinical trials obtain experience with study-provided treatment that could inform their further therapy by awareness of the efficacy or inefficacy of the study treatment they received. However, patients in blinded trials typically do not learn right after their participation what treatment they actually received during the study, even though it is possible to do so while maintaining the necessary blinding of investigators. Keeping investigators and subjects blind to treatment assignment throughout a trial is a key element of clinical research methodology, but the value of keeping participants and their medical providers blinded after participation is less certain and may pose risks that include delay in the receipt of efficacious care, exacerbation of symptoms, or prolonged exposure to superfluous or toxic treatment. The significance of these risks is likely to vary with the specific disease and the time course of its response to available therapies. Currently, it seems appropriate for investigators a) to evaluate the risks of keeping subjects blind after participation, b) to justify doing so in relation to serious, identifiable risks to the study's validity and apprise prospective subjects clearly that information about their response to specific treatment during the trial will not be available to guide their post-study care, and c) to consider methods for debriefing subjects before their resumption of open treatment that preserve the integrity of investigator blinding. In the long-run, research on the impact that keeping subjects uninformed about study treatment has on post-study patient outcomes and on study integrity can foster the development of procedures that optimally balance both.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15911463      PMCID: PMC2945282          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2005.01.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  25 in total

1.  Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 2: practical issues and specific cases.

Authors:  S S Ellenberg; R Temple
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2000-09-19       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Drug-related information generates placebo and nocebo responses that modify the drug response.

Authors:  M A Flaten; T Simonsen; H Olsen
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.312

Review 3.  Use and abuse of placebo in phase III trials.

Authors:  F García-Alonso; E Guallar; O M Bakke; X Carné
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 4.  Questing for grails: duplicity, betrayal and self-deception in postmodern medical research.

Authors:  G J Annas
Journal:  J Contemp Health Law Policy       Date:  1996

5.  Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.

Authors:  K F Schulz; I Chalmers; R J Hayes; D G Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-02-01       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a "trial effect".

Authors:  D A Braunholtz; S J Edwards; R J Lilford
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Federal policy for the protection of human subjects. Final rule.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  1991-06-18

8.  Lithium treatment of acute mania in adolescents: a placebo-controlled discontinuation study.

Authors:  Vivian Kafantaris; Daniel J Coletti; Robert Dicker; Gina Padula; Richard R Pleak; Jose Maria J Alvir
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 8.829

9.  Blinding, unblinding, and the placebo effect: an analysis of patients' guesses of treatment assignment in a double-blind clinical trial.

Authors:  M Moscucci; L Byrne; M Weintraub; C Cox
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  How blind was the patient blind in AMIS?

Authors:  J Howard; A S Whittemore; J J Hoover; M Panos
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1982-11       Impact factor: 6.875

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Open label extension studies: research or marketing?

Authors:  G J Taylor; P Wainwright
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-09-10

2.  Unblinding in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Research Ethics Case.

Authors:  Ayesha Bhatia; Paul S Appelbaum; Katherine L Wisner
Journal:  Ethics Hum Res       Date:  2021-03

Review 3.  Blinding in Clinical Trials: Seeing the Big Picture.

Authors:  Thomas F Monaghan; Christina W Agudelo; Syed N Rahman; Alan J Wein; Jason M Lazar; Karel Everaert; Roger R Dmochowski
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.430

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.