| scholarly article | Q13442814 |
| meta-analysis | Q815382 |
| P50 | author | Carl Thomas Anthon | Q59117079 |
| Morten Hylander Møller | Q87875689 | ||
| Anders Perner | Q43973788 | ||
| Anders Granholm | Q49702507 | ||
| Jon H Laake | Q56333900 | ||
| P2860 | cites work | Blinding was judged more difficult to achieve and maintain in nonpharmacologic than pharmacologic trials | Q57286644 |
| The Landscape and Lexicon of Blinding in Randomized Trials | Q64112416 | ||
| Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: a systematic review | Q21090146 | ||
| The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration | Q21092360 | ||
| Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement | Q21195843 | ||
| Statistics notes: blinding in clinical trials and other studies | Q24524794 | ||
| Effects of suggestion and conditioning on the action of chemical agents in human subjects; the pharmacology of placebos | Q24562956 | ||
| Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study | Q24653790 | ||
| Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials | Q27860735 | ||
| GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations | Q27860753 | ||
| GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence | Q29547891 | ||
| Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation | Q29615706 | ||
| Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials | Q29618659 | ||
| GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) | Q29619791 | ||
| "Do not resuscitate" decisions in acute respiratory distress syndrome. A secondary analysis of clinical trial data | Q30868744 | ||
| Quality of evidence is a key determinant for making a strong GRADE guidelines recommendation | Q33421165 | ||
| Impact of quality of evidence on the strength of recommendations: an empirical study | Q33484962 | ||
| The ethical problems with sham surgery in clinical research | Q33739165 | ||
| Physician interpretations and textbook definitions of blinding terminology in randomized controlled trials | Q33942896 | ||
| The impact of blinding on the results of a randomized, placebo-controlled multiple sclerosis clinical trial | Q34348362 | ||
| How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. | Q35065178 | ||
| Bias in clinical intervention research. | Q36380552 | ||
| GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes | Q38006189 | ||
| Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomised controlled trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies | Q38044510 | ||
| Mortality in Multicenter Critical Care Trials: An Analysis of Interventions With a Significant Effect. | Q41141860 | ||
| Practical tips for surgical research: blinding: who, what, when, why, how? | Q42077047 | ||
| Single-blind randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy in children | Q43572289 | ||
| Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what | Q52937785 | ||
| P433 | issue | 7 | |
| P407 | language of work or name | English | Q1860 |
| P304 | page(s) | e016187 | |
| P577 | publication date | 2017-07-11 | |
| P1433 | published in | BMJ Open | Q17003470 |
| P1476 | title | The effect of blinding on estimates of mortality in randomised clinical trials of intensive care interventions: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis | |
| P478 | volume | 7 |
Search more.