ライフサイエンスコーパス: blind

1 l questionnaire (participant aware, assessor blinded).

2 pirin/clopidogrel vs aspirin/placebo; double-blinded).

3 pies to restore some degree of vision to the blind.

4 auma history) with informants were performed blinded.

5 allocation to DSM265 and placebo was double-blinded.

6 12-week, single-blind, 3-group randomized noninferiority trial and subse

7 By 2020, among the global population who are blind (38.5 million [13.2 million to 70.9 million]), the

8 es (BE IN CONTROL) study was an investigator-blinded, 6-month, 2-arm randomized clinical trial conduc

9 We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study.

10 We did a double-blind, allocation concealed, randomised, placebo-control

11 A blinded analysis of eight CM formulas, one nonhydrolyzed

12 This double-blind and placebo (or low-dose)-controlled randomized cl

13 g experiments: (1) word reading (Braille for blind and print for sighted participants), and (2) liste

14 y presented to the same 9 dermatologists for blinded assessment from September 22, 2011, to April 1,

15 The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in partici

16 on to 70.9 million]), the number of patients blind because of cataract is anticipated to rise to 13.4

17 eptors, thereby restoring vision in patients blinded by retinal degeneration.

18 t, baseline differences, blinding (patient), blinding (care provider [care provider is a specific qua

19 was perceived to be more comfortable by both blinded caregivers and nurses (caregivers: 84% for the l

20 dyskinesia score (items 1-7), as assessed by blinded central AIMS video raters.

21 Participants had blinded central analyses of baseline and 24 h CTs, with

22 urrence in the resection cavity, assessed by blinded central review of brain MRI scans by the study n

23 onal optimization, historical constraint, or blind chance.

24 xhibited enhanced functional connectivity in blind children and that this reorganization was spatiall

25 We conducted a randomized double-blind clinical trial in adults with NDD-CKD and iron def

26 of actinic keratosis in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial involving 131 participants.

27 y-phase trial data are promising, reports of blinding complications from cell interventions remain tr

28 Various blinding conditions in humans, such as Leber congenital

29 The use of a placebo and of double-blind control groups in surgery CTs would improves the q

30 ative organism that has the ability to cause blinding corneal infections following trauma and during

31 -39393406 (100 mg b.i.d.) or placebo (double-blind, counter-balanced).

32 We performed a double-blind crossover challenge of 59 individuals on a self-in

33 ding dose cohorts underwent a further double-blind crossover, placebo-controlled oral gluten challeng

34 Using a prospective, randomized, single-blind, crossover study design, we therefore measured EE

35 In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study, twelve normoglycaemic men (BMI 2

36 We consider an active particle performing a blind cruise search for nonregenerating sparse targets i

37 reduction in spleen volume as determined by blinded CT and MRI at a central imaging laboratory).

38 identify novel targets for treatment of this blinding disease.

39 ive vitreoretinopathy (FEVR) is an inherited blinding disorder characterized by the abnormal developm

40 We performed a randomized, parallel, single-blind dose-ranging phase 2 trial in the Lao People's Dem

41 iple Therapy) trial was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study comparing 24 weeks of once-dai

42 ange in performance (neither in sighted, nor blind echo expert participants).

43 We undertook this randomised, double-blind, efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety study of the

44 -group, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial, consenting patients with type 2

45 (ASTER) study was a randomized, open-label, blinded end-point clinical trial conducted in 8 comprehe

46 lel-group, open-label treatment trial with a blinded end-point evaluation to compare GA with CS for t

47 mined 3 months beyond catheter ablation by a blinded end-point evaluation.

48 tional, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial in adult participants with ischae

49 re, parallel group, superiority, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial, patients

50 erid species petunia (Petunia hybrida), AP2B/BLIND ENHANCER (BEN) confines the C-function to the inne

51 This enables accurate blinded estimation of ankle function purely from motor n

52 ospective-specimen-collection, retrospective-blinded-evaluation (PRoBE) criteria.

53 less at 180 days per central adjudication by blinded evaluators.

54 13) were randomized in a double-dummy double-blind fashion to either extended-duration oral betrixaba

55 ark sets and in a recent CASP performed in a blind fashion.

56 nary syndrome episodes were adjudicated in a blinded fashion by an independent clinical events commit

57 mg) or weekly oral alendronate (70 mg) in a blinded fashion for 12 months, followed by open-label al

58 for TP53, KRAS, and EGFR were determined in blinded fashion in multiple laboratories.

59 mized, crossover, controlled studies (double-blinded for the supplements), each on 16 healthy volunte

60 Geographic atrophy is a blinding form of age-related macular degeneration charac

61 onstrate evidence of reorganization into the blind half field, they also reveal significant unexpecte

62 We conducted a double-blind, household-cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled

63 Some blind humans have developed echolocation, as a method of

64 A blinded independent expert panel adjudicated all events.

65 ystem (BI-RADS) categories assigned by seven blinded independent readers to benign and malignant brea

66 mild-to-moderate AD in a randomized, double-blind, intraindividual comparison of 3 approved agents a

67 were randomized equally to receive 15 double-blind intravenous infusions of adjunctive lanicemine 50

68 ed, description of attempts to limit bias if blinding is not possible, and specification of the delay

69 d trials should pay attention that status of blinding is unambiguously reported.

70 ns (eg, surgical randomized clinical trials) blinding is usually more difficult.

71 s with ischemic cardiomyopathy received in a blinded manner either 20 million (n=15) or 100 million (

72 >/=6 mg/dl in women) randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive placebo or allopurinol for 12

73 oterenol (1 or 2 mug) were administered in a blinded manner while participants continuously rated the

74 fication of the remaining isolates in a user-blinded manner.

75 psies and cases were carefully reviewed in a blinded manner.

76 can functionally integrate into congenitally blind mice.

77 Methods A prespecified, blinded molecular analysis of Cancer Esophagus Gefitinib

78 ncing of antigen-receptor rearrangements and blind multicenter reanalysis of flow cytometric data, re

79 We did a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 2 trial of a combination of ose

80 This randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial was done in 87 centres

81 In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority

82 We did a double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised withd

83 ORBITA is a blinded, multicentre randomised trial of PCI versus a pl

84 This randomised, double-blind, multiperiod, phase 3 trial was done at 38 clinics

85 A randomized, double-blind, multisite placebo-controlled trial conducted in h

86 Congenitally blind (n = 10, 9 female, 1 male) and sighted control (n

87 An interlaboratory study, conducted using blinded NA008 High GC reference material to assess repro

88 eropenem in a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, non-inferiority trial (REPROVE).

89 In a single-center, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving adults with unipol

90 and Methods This was a randomized, partially blinded, noninferiority trial that involved survivors of

91 The intraclass coefficient between 2 blinded operators was 0.962 with a 95% confidence interv

92 ifications, fewer than half were randomized, blinded, or controlled, and most primary outcomes were b

93 ndomized, controlled, open-label trials with blinded outcome evaluation: the POT-KAST trial, which in

94 metric used by the CBN Risk of Bias tool]), blinding (outcome), co-interventions, compliance, dropou

95 In this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial done at 152 sites i

96 This randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial was done in 18

97 ously developed an algorithm that automates "blind" patching in vivo, but full automation of visually

98 mization, concealment, baseline differences, blinding (patient), blinding (care provider [care provid

99 cally significantly decrease from 17 (11.8%) blind patients and 55 (38.2%) visually impaired patients

100 Some blind people have developed extraordinary proficiency in

101 on TOJ judgments in sighted but not in early blind people.

102 ulticenter cohort via prespecified analysis, blinded per prospective-specimen-collection, retrospecti

103 currence of any mood event during the double-blind period.

104 d phase for 8 weeks and a randomised, double-blind phase (parts 1 and 2, reported here) for 12 weeks,

105 ASPIRE consisted of an open-label, double-blind phase for 8 weeks and a randomised, double-blind p

106 During the double-blind phase, five (33%) patients assigned to BIIB074 ver

107 iscontinued from the study during the double-blind phase.

108 074 or placebo for up to 28 days in a double-blind phase.

109 line) averaged over months 4-6 of the double-blind phase.

110 Two patients in the blinded phase (1 in the placebo and 1 in the IVIg group)

111 In this randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 45-85 y

112 We did this single-blind, phase 2, randomised controlled trial (SUPEREDEN3)

113 In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study, we assigned 3396 patients with ven

114 month randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 395 patients,

115 ents and Methods In this multicenter, double-blind, phase III trial, patients were randomly assigned

116 se risk factor and glycaemic control (single-blind placebo in the final month).

117 ater reduction from baseline than the double-blind placebo in the NRS (-23%, 95% CI -45 to -1; p=0.03

118 resonance imaging (fMRI) in a 2-drug, double-blind placebo-controlled crossover design conducted from

119 In a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover design, the immune sy

120 In Experiment 1, a double-blind placebo-controlled pharmacology study, we measured

121 y or matching placebo in a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled phase.

122 allergen-specific IgE, we performed a double-blind placebo-controlled pilot trial in which birch poll

123 In a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study, 56 patients with moderat

124 urpose To determine, in a multicenter double-blinded placebo-controlled trial, whether maximal hepati

125 ng 12 patients; a phase 3 randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study involving 186 patients;

126 (Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Study of the Short Term Clinic

127 Bangladeshi children from 2 previous double-blind, placebo-controlled cluster-randomized trials were

128 investigator-initiated, multicenter, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover clinical trial was c

129 In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study of individuals

130 We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study with single-do

131 or each food, or both, and a positive double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at 500 mg or le

132 tients with peanut allergy undergoing double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge to peanut.

133 ) had peanut sensitivity and positive double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges to an elicitin

134 In two double-blind, placebo-controlled immunotherapy studies, 33 pati

135 To this end, we combined double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacology [D2 receptor (D2R

136 In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 study (BERIL-1), we re

137 This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT was powered on a 5% differ

138 duces chorea, was well tolerated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

139 ic resonance imaging to a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) of antidepressant

140 This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessed the effects of

141 METHODS AND TIME was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing 150 million bo

142 Part 1 consisted of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done over 18 months.

143 We conducted a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 27 centers across Nor

144 METHOD: This 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included patients with s

145 raline Trial (CAST) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 201 patients w

146 We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 30,449 adults

147 conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients in wh

148 We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of amitriptyline (1 mg p

149 ce Intervention After Stroke trial, a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pioglitazone for seco

150 This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial recruited patients aged

151 prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 96 HT recipients were r

152 For this international, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients (>/=18 y

153 In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly allocated 1

154 In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 17

155 In a preregistered, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we tested the effect of

156 line in a pre-registered, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

157 In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-subject design, healt

158 ional magnetic resonance imaging in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design to determine

159 We conducted a phase I, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating study of BMS-

160 We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial of intr

161 This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study evaluated t

162 The BELLE-2 trial was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study.

163 We conducted a phase 2, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-ascending-dose trial

164 In this 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 401 par

165 In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 93 EoE

166 The study was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial of patients wit

167 DIANT-4 is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 97 cent

168 ts were eligible for this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial if they had sym

169 In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly as

170 In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited p

171 We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3, crossover trial to e

172 NEURAPRO, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, wa

173 Rigorous double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trials,

174 A multinational, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study i

175 We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, fixed-dose clinic

176 This phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-centre, crossover tria

177 Using a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject crossover desi

178 ion in 21 healthy human subjects in a double-blinded, placebo (saline)-controlled, cross-over design.

179 s with mild asthma were enrolled in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled crossover study to assess th

180 A double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial wa

181 In a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study, adults were challenge

182 Double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial at 9 academic medical

183 egion with Malaria) was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial conducted in malaria-e

184 Patients and Methods In this double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, patients with HER2-po

185 We performed a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel intervention study

186 In this 1-year, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (LIBERTY AD C

187 r visualization and in-situ measurements of "blind" processes.

188 Through blinded profiling of postoperative plasma, we observe ev

189 he 100% specificity and 95% sensitivity of a blind prospective study.

190 Blinded, prospective multicenter observational clinical

191 Blinded quantification of left ventricular and right ven

192 METHODS AND We undertook a double-blind randomised controlled trial of small-quantity lipi

193 In this double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled u

194 We did this multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial (IMPACT)

195 This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which pat

196 In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial in seven Danish university clini

197 We did a multicentre, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial with follow-up at 4

198 DEPICT-1 was a double-blind, randomised, parallel-controlled, three-arm, phase

199 The phase 2, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled MERIT-1 trial asse

200 dy in a pilot safety cohort, we did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial based in Don

201 We report two double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials in adults w

202 MED was a multicentre, international, single-blind, randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-concept tri

203 In this single-blind randomized clinical trial, 8003 adults with acute

204 A single-blind randomized crossover design was used.

205 accrued between 2006 and 2010 to the double-blind randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

206 10 SCA38 patients, and carried out a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study for 16 weeks,

207 -week open-label period and a 26-week double-blind randomized withdrawal period.

208 Multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial including 500 patients

209 This parallel-design, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, called Resveratrol to

210 In a double-blind, randomized controlled trial, once-daily inhaled p

211 ed as anemic.In this 2 x 2 factorial, double-blind, randomized trial, nonpregnant women (aged 18-45 y

212 This double-blind, randomized, controlled trial investigates the eff

213 o.) and placebo over 2 test days in a double-blind, randomized, counterbalanced, cross-over design.

214 ude and skin color.In a longitudinal, double-blind, randomized, food-based intervention study, 5- to

215 We conducted a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled tr

216 Therefore, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial in

217 In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, 74 particip

218 isting knowledge gaps, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to investiga

219 In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed

220 Using a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel design,

221 In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, we

222 Myocardial Infarction 54) (ticagrelor) were blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trials of antipla

223 , a prospective, replicate dosing, partially blinded, randomized, 3-treatment, 6-period crossover bio

224 We performed a blinded, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing iodi

225 ness of clinical symptoms was evaluated by 3 blinded raters with a standardized video protocol and cl

226 n the same CT images, bias was eliminated by blinding RCTS to ONSD measurement.

227 -based immunotherapeutic strategies to treat blinding recurrent herpes infection and disease.

228 interventions have the potential to address blinding retinal diseases that affect hundreds of millio

229 city and 92% sensitivity of CSF RT-QuIC in a blinded retrospective analysis matched the 100% specific

230 The model was finally validated using blind samples, obtaining an accuracy in oil classificati

231 Twenty-one laboratories measured four blinded samples containing different quantities of a KRA

232 apping conditions, types were assigned to 24 blinded samples.

233 l record review using data-capture forms and blinded scoring of neuroimaging.

234 ause the disease is multifocal, and multiple blind scouting biopsies are usually performed in this se

235 ence set of 96 unexposed serum samples and a blinded set of 80 samples treated with OPNAs.

236 sis revealed, however, that the congenitally blind showed enhanced functional connectivity between pa

237 eatures, machine-learning algorithms achieve blind single cell classification with up to 95% accuracy

238 This randomized clinical and partially blinded single-center trial was conducted in a neonatal

239 This phase 1b/2, observer-blind, single-center study (NCT01193920) enrolled infant

240 Randomized, assessor-blinded, single-center study within Region Zealand and t

241 The trial was double-blinded; some unmasking took place at age 2 years for an

242 Blinded specimen sets from human stool, chemostats, and

243 es included enlargement and expansion of the blind spot extending into large pericentral or other typ

244 ed by large scotomata at or connected to the blind spot), ocular findings (paucity of pigmentary chan

245 behaved opposite to optimal, preferring the blind-spot stimulus as the better example of a collinear

246 al of 99 studies were deemed as relevant and blinding status assessed.

247 Occluder to Medical Management) was a double-blind study investigating migraine characteristics over

248 In a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study of 162 HIV-negative RV144 vaccine recipients

249 A blind study was conducted on a well-characterized panel

250 oral experiments in sighted and congenitally blind subjects.

251 with individual counseling and standardized, blinded, target-driven medical therapy.

252 conduct and reporting of each test was done blind to other test results.

253 ophils and other immune cells were virtually blind to the pathogen's presence.

254 e laboratory also interpreted CT angiography blinded to clinical data, site interpretation, and outco

255 Automated pupillometry results were blinded to clinicians involved in patient care.

256 us and thrombotic etiologies were diagnosed, blinded to exposure levels.

257 re video recorded and assessed by two raters blinded to group allocation using the modified Advocacy-

258 icipants, clinicians, and investigators were blinded to group assignment.

259 s was done by independent neuropsychologists blinded to group assignment.

260 All outcomes were collected by staff blinded to group randomization, and no participants with

261 The same two readers, who were not blinded to histopathologic findings, retrospectively rev

262 Diagnostic assessments were blinded to mass spectrometry results.

263 All participants and study staff were blinded to polyunsaturated fatty acid or placebo assignm

264 ted from the medical record by a neurologist blinded to radiologic data.

265 reviewed independently by 2 epileptologists, blinded to relative or control status.

266 Women and clinicians were blinded to results unless cervical shortening less than

267 All imaging observers were blinded to the biopsy results, and all hepatopathologist

268 were analyzed postoperatively by 2 surgeons blinded to the histopathology results, and mean radiance

269 Two radiologists who were blinded to the image acquisition technique semiquantitat

270 psy results, and all hepatopathologists were blinded to the imaging results.

271 They were blinded to the laterality of microneedle and sham roller

272 endent, trained research assistants who were blinded to the test results.

273 essed at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 mo, by nurses blinded to treatment allocation, using the Eczema Area a

274 ssing the participants during follow-up were blinded to treatment assignment.

275 ers, researchers, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment.

276 Limitations: Participants were not blinded to treatment assignment.

277 Patients were randomly assigned (blinded) to groups given counselling to follow a sham di

278 critical for meeting elimination criteria of blinding trachoma.

279 Randomized, double-blind, treat-to-target crossover trial including two 32-

280 times per day orally during a 12-week double-blind treatment period.

281 mumab were randomized to receive 12 weeks of blind treatment with placebo or MABp1, a true human anti

282 A patient subgroup remained on blinded treatment for up to 52 weeks.

283 ME-Meso is a phase II/III randomized, double-blind trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of ni

284 orty-six CAE children in a randomized double-blind trial of ethosuximide, lamotrigine, and valproate

285 cruited for a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy (4

286 In the blind trial set, the panel correctly classified 93.33% A

287 In a double-blind trial, patients were randomized to tolvaptan 30 mg

288 In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 2157 patients with acu

289 llel-group, randomised, controlled, observer-blind trial.

290 wal, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

291 control.In a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial, 220 participants aged 18-60 y with body m

292 women participating in a randomized, double-blinded trial, we assessed the effect of periodic presum

293 prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial.

294 votal Study (Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blind, U.S. Multi-Center Study to Evaluate Treatment of

295 A blinded, unsupervised hierarchical clustering of partici

296 Visual acuity was blind (VA >20/400) in 38.5% of eyes with uveitis.

297 99.2%; internal test sets, 66.7%; external (blind validation) test set, 68.4%.

298 , that were then tested against a 133 sample blinded verification set.

299 with wild-type and epithelial cell receptor-blind viruses demonstrated the importance of epithelial

300 nd the site monitor, and the study team were blinded, with the exception of site personnel needing th