Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

How "blind" are double-blind studies?

J Margraf1, A Ehlers, W T Roth

  • 1Philipps-University Marburg, Federal Republic of Germany.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
|February 1, 1991
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cold atmospheric pressure plasma for treatment of chronic wounds: drug or medical device?

Journal of wound care·2017
Same author

BMAL1 links the circadian clock to viral airway pathology and asthma phenotypes.

Mucosal immunology·2017
Same author

Virtual reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders.

Psychological medicine·2017
Same author

A prospective study of pre-trauma risk factors for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression.

Psychological medicine·2016
Same author

Post-traumatic stress influences the brain even in the absence of symptoms: A systematic, quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies.

Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews·2015
Same author

Obesity prevention in defined (high school) populations.

International journal of obesity supplements·2014
Same journal

Effect of third-wave cognitive behavioral therapy in adults with acquired brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
Same journal

Effectiveness of stepped counseling on depression in distressed family caregivers of older adults: A randomized pragmatic trial (ReDiCare).

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
Same journal

Dysfunctional attitudes in cognitive-behavioral therapy and antidepressant pharmacotherapy for adult depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data.

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
Same journal

Complete delivery matters: Multilevel complier average causal effect analysis of universal mental health curricula in two randomized controlled trials in U.K. schools.

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
Same journal

Investigating craving as an indicator of early response to buprenorphine treatment among adults with opioid use disorder.

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
Same journal

Mental health benchmarks in the United States: An unheeded call to action.

Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·2026
See all related articles

In psychopharmacology, a study found that patients and physicians could often identify active drugs versus placebo in panic disorder trials. This challenges the internal validity of the double-blind method.

Area of Science:

  • Psychopharmacology
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry

Background:

  • Psychopharmacological research commonly employs double-blind designs to mitigate bias from nonspecific treatment effects.
  • Ensuring the integrity of blinding is crucial for the internal validity of clinical trials.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the effectiveness of blinding in a randomized, double-blind comparison of alprazolam, imipramine, and placebo for panic disorder.
  • To investigate whether patients and physicians can accurately distinguish between active medication and placebo, and between different active medications.

Main Methods:

  • A randomized, double-blind trial involving 59 patients diagnosed with panic disorder.
  • Participants and their physicians were asked to identify whether active drug or placebo was administered at the midpoint of the treatment.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Physicians also assessed their ability to differentiate between the two active drugs (alprazolam and imipramine).

    • Main Results:

    • The majority of panic disorder patients (N=59) and their physicians accurately identified whether they received active drug or placebo.
    • Physicians demonstrated an ability to distinguish between the two active medications, alprazolam and imipramine.
    • Accurate identification was possible by the midpoint of the treatment duration.

    Conclusions:

    • The high rate of correct identification by both patients and physicians raises concerns about the internal validity of the double-blind strategy in this panic disorder study.
    • The findings suggest that the "double-blind" status may be compromised, potentially influencing the interpretation of treatment outcomes in psychopharmacological research.
    • Further research is needed to explore methods for enhancing or verifying the integrity of blinding in clinical trials for panic disorder.