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 Concept Videos

Blinding01:11

Blinding

3.8K
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
3.8K
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

8.8K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
8.8K
Blind Procedures02:07

Blind Procedures

12.8K
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
12.8K
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs01:20

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

221
Body:Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to...
221
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

356
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
356
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

177
Body:Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
177

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Lipoprotein(a) lipidome and chronic kidney disease: Enrichment in triacylglycerols and diacylglycerols.

Journal of clinical lipidology·2026
Same author

Authors' Response to Comments by Di Tanna et al.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

The association between risk of bias and effect sizes of spinal manipulative therapy in low back pain trials: meta-epidemiological protocol.

MethodsX·2026
Same author

Lipoprotein(a) lipidome and diet: responses to reducing saturated fat intake in African Americans in a randomized trial.

Journal of lipid research·2026
Same author

Prevalence of undiagnosed hypertension and risk assessment using a validated survey in community-based screening in Amman, Jordan.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Meta-Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness.

Statistics in medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 14, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

15.0K

Unmasking three blinding indices for randomized controlled trials: comparison and application.

Javier Muñoz Laguna1,2,3, Jafar Kolahi4, Heejung Bang5

  • 1Musculoskeletal Epidemiology Research Group, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI) and University Spine Centre Zurich (UWZH), University of Zurich and Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.

Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
|October 27, 2025
PubMed
Summary

This study compares three blinding indices for randomized controlled trials. It offers guidance on assessing and reporting blinding in clinical trials, highlighting the strengths and limitations of each index.

Keywords:
Blinding assessmentClinical trialDouble-blind methodMaskingSingle-blind method

More Related Videos

Acupoint Catgut Embedding Therapy in Traditional Chinese Medicine for Managing Allergic Rhinitis
03:40

Acupoint Catgut Embedding Therapy in Traditional Chinese Medicine for Managing Allergic Rhinitis

Published on: December 20, 2024

1.3K
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
06:19

Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia

Published on: September 27, 2024

518

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 14, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

15.0K
Acupoint Catgut Embedding Therapy in Traditional Chinese Medicine for Managing Allergic Rhinitis
03:40

Acupoint Catgut Embedding Therapy in Traditional Chinese Medicine for Managing Allergic Rhinitis

Published on: December 20, 2024

1.3K
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
06:19

Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia

Published on: September 27, 2024

518

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Trials Methodology
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Research Integrity

Background:

  • Blinding is crucial for reducing bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
  • Existing blinding indices lack comparative guidance for application in clinical research.
  • Standardized assessment of blinding is essential for trial validity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare three available blinding indices for estimating blinding effectiveness in RCTs.
  • To provide practical guidance on the application and interpretation of these indices.
  • To identify the strengths and limitations of each index for researchers.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of three distinct blinding indices.
  • Application of indices to both hypothetical and real-world clinical trial datasets.
  • Qualitative assessment of index performance and usability.

Main Results:

  • Each blinding index demonstrated unique strengths and limitations in assessing blinding.
  • The study provides a practical tutorial for applying these indices.
  • Identified key considerations for choosing and interpreting blinding index results.

Conclusions:

  • The comparison offers valuable insights for the assessment, estimation, and reporting of blinding in RCTs.
  • Researchers can use these findings to improve the methodological rigor of their trials.
  • Enhanced understanding of blinding indices contributes to more reliable clinical trial outcomes.