1 e-blind after infusion 14 among 54 patients,
single-blind 1 week later among 39 patients, and nonblin
2 October 2005 and August 2008, we conducted a
single-blind,
12-month, randomized controlled trial of t
3 disorder received placebo intranasal spray (
single-blind)
15 minutes before laboratory-simulated pub
4 ntidepressant administration, we performed a
single-blinded 2-week crossover randomized clinical tria
5 In a multicenter, randomized,
single-blind,
2-arm crossover trial, 240 patients underw
6 cale registry-based randomized, multicenter,
single-blind,
2-arm, noninferiority trial-compared 2 bio
7 en) participated in two separate randomized,
single-blind,
2-day protocols.
8 Prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
24-week study with blinded end point asses
9 In this pragmatic,
single-blind,
3-arm, randomized trial (SMS-Text Adherenc
10 12-week,
single-blind,
3-group randomized noninferiority trial an
11 In this randomized, international, 2-center,
single-blinded,
3-arm study, STEMI patients were randoml
12 After a
single-blind,
4-5-week placebo run-in period, 332 patien
13 After a
single-blind,
4-week placebo run-in, patients were rando
14 receive rapamycin or methotrexate (MTX) in a
single-blind,
48-week study.
15 In a randomized
single-blind 8-week study, patients with clozapine-resis
16 On 2 measurement days, subjects consumed
single-blinded a plain low-fat yogurt or low-fat yogurt
17 OUT IV) trial was a randomized multicenter,
single-blind,
all-comer, 2-arm, noninferiority trial com
18 In a
single-blinded and placebo-controlled crossover study of
19 e randomized and nonrandomized double-blind,
single-blind,
and open-label clinical trials of any phar
20 ) was proven in all patients with the use of
single-blinded ASA challenges.
21 on groups and treatment methods, be at least
single-blinded,
assess biologic mechanisms, have adequat
22 In this
single-blind case-crossover study, 41 healthy subjects u
23 rt the outcome of the first cross-sectional,
single-blind clinical performance evaluation of a urine
24 , AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, randomized,
single-blind clinical trial conducted between October 20
25 -mo, randomized, positive-comparator, 2-arm,
single-blind clinical trial in 211 patients treated with
26 ty Promotion Trial (ADAPT) was a randomized,
single-blind clinical trial lasting 18 months that was d
27 In this randomized,
single-blind clinical trial, we randomly assigned childr
28 TIENTS: Multicenter, randomized, controlled,
single-blinded clinical trial based on the Iron (Fe) and
29 Randomized,
single-blind,
clinical trial among 217 dyads (1 parent:
30 tting, and Participants: Phase 3 randomized,
single-blind,
clinical trial conducted from March 1, 201
31 In a
single-blind,
code-based, placebo-controlled, counterbal
32 This
single-blind,
community-based, randomized clinical trial
33 The authors conducted a randomized,
single-blind controlled comparison of routine care with
34 Donors were randomized to receive, in a
single-blind controlled fashion, 600 mg of intravenous N
35 In a
single-blind controlled prospective study of 60 patients
36 This was a parallel-group, randomized,
single-blind controlled trial carried out in an intellec
37 We conducted a prospective,
single-blind,
controlled hypobaric-chamber study of adul
38 , AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
controlled study conducted in 54 centers i
39 This is a prospective, randomized (1:1),
single-blind,
controlled trial comparing outcomes of pat
40 SPIRIT III trial, a prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
controlled trial enrolling patients at 65
41 NG, AND PATIENTS: A prospective, randomized,
single-blinded,
controlled trial of 1161 patients presen
42 al across subjects/groups, except that, in a
single-blind,
counterbalanced design, CD received intrav
43 In this multisite randomized
single-blind cross-over study, 44 patients (mean age, 49
44 We performed a
single blind,
cross-over study involving 12 CD patients
45 In a
single-blind,
cross-over study, 10 trained cyclists (age
46 We performed a randomized,
single-blind,
cross-over study, with 2 study visits 4 we
47 ustralian diet, in a randomized, controlled,
single-blind,
cross-over trial of patients with IBS.
48 In a separate randomized,
single-blind,
cross-over validation study, 6 additional
49 s lorazepam (LRZ; 0.01 mg/kg) or saline in a
single-blinded,
cross-over design (two sessions separate
50 ement doses" of leptin (Wt(-10%leptin)) in a
single-blind crossover design with a 2-wk washout period
51 ncluded in a randomized, placebo-controlled,
single-blind crossover study and compared with 12 health
52 In a randomized,
single-blinded crossover study, 12 healthy white men [me
53 Using a prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
crossover study design, we therefore measu
54 of EGP, eight healthy men were studied in a
single-blind,
crossover study with two randomized visits
55 In a prospective, single-center,
single-blind,
crossover study, 56 patients with non-ST-e
56 DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A
single-blind,
crossover study, performed in a hypobaric
57 stural tachycardia syndrome in a randomized,
single-blind,
crossover study.
58 ectively) at baseline and during randomized,
single-blind,
crossover treatment with conjugated equine
59 kg/m(2)) of 24.3 +/- 4.4 were enrolled in a
single-blind,
crossover, randomized controlled trial.
60 0.4 mg/kg oral amphetamine in a fixed-order
single-blind design and were imaged on a triple-head tom
61 Two groups of participants were tested in a
single-blind design.
62 asions according to a randomized, crossover,
single-blinded design.
63 We performed a randomized, parallel,
single-blind dose-ranging phase 2 trial in the Lao Peopl
64 A
single-blind dose-titration study determined the most ap
65 A
single-blind,
dose-dependent, parallel randomized contro
66 In a monocenter, placebo-controlled,
single-blind,
dose-escalation pilot study, 18 subjects w
67 In this phase 2,
single-blind,
dose-ranging, adaptive randomised trial, w
68 In this 104-week, randomised,
single-blind (
double-blind until week 12 and investigato
69 Terms such as
single blind,
double blind, and triple blind mean differ
70 This study was a prospective,
single-blinded,
education research study of 48 neurology
71 DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:
Single-blind effectiveness trial at 7 university-based a
72 The present study was designed as a
single-blind,
escalating-dose phase I trial to evaluate
73 MORE CARE was a multicentre,
single-blind,
factorial, randomised controlled trial in
74 implant, subjects were randomly assigned in
single-blind fashion to a treatment group in whom daily
75 The histologic sections were scored, in a
single-blind fashion, for ciliary damage, ulceration, he
76 ed 1 in 5, 1 in 10, 1 in 25, and 1 in 50) in
single-blind fashion.
77 ng artificial sweeteners (n = 10) were given
single-blind in a 10-wk parallel design.
78 male volunteers were randomly assigned to a
single-blind intervention of either a single dose of the
79 Single-blind low-dose (n = 42), high-dose (n = 40), or p
80 timal single- or dual-chamber detection in a
single-blind manner.
81 random-allocation or double-blind method, or
single-blind method or uncontrolled-trials with vitamin
82 In a prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
multicenter study, 141 patients with sympt
83 as a secondary analysis of a North American,
single-blind,
multicenter, cluster-randomized, clinical
84 In this prospective,
single-blind,
multicenter, randomized trial, the authors
85 We did a randomised,
single-blind,
multicentre, phase 3 study (DESSOLVE III)
86 We undertook a
single-blind,
multicentre, randomised controlled trial i
87 In a
single-blind,
multicentre, randomised trial, we enrolled
88 SCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated,
single-blind,
multicentre, randomized, noninferiority tr
89 CHAMPION trial was a prospective, parallel,
single-blinded,
multicentre study that enrolled particip
90 In this phase 2b,
single-blind,
non-inferiority trial (CLARITY), adults (a
91 Randomized,
single-blind noninferiority trial conducted between the
92 (A Prospective Randomized Multicenter
Single-Blind Noninferiority Trial to Assess the Safety a
93 We performed a
single-blinded noninferiority trial to compare periopera
94 the EVOLVE study, a prospective, randomized,
single-blind,
noninferiority trial.
95 ouble-blind) and fruit and vegetable intake (
single-blind)
on bone turnover over 2 y.
96 ticenter randomized controlled trial, with a
single-blind parallel design, was conducted between 2006
97 A prospective, placebo-controlled,
single-blind,
parallel group study was carried out inclu
98 ANTS: A single-center, 18-month, randomized,
single-blind,
parallel group trial enrolled 60 low-funct
99 prospective, randomised, active-controlled,
single-blind,
parallel two-group, multicentre clinical t
100 In this
single-blind,
parallel, controlled, dietary intervention
101 In this
single-blind,
parallel, group randomised controlled tria
102 METHODS AND In this
single-blind,
parallel, randomised controlled trial, adu
103 andomized to one of four dose groups in this
single-blind,
parallel, randomized, control trial.
104 was a prospective, multicenter, randomized,
single-blind,
parallel-controlled trial of 274 New York
105 In a randomized, controlled,
single-blind,
parallel-group dietary intervention, 195 m
106 SIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized,
single-blind,
parallel-group trial that enrolled 1902 pr
107 In this randomised, controlled,
single-blind,
parallel-group trial we enrolled adults (a
108 We performed a
single-blinded,
parallel-group, randomized controlled tr
109 Design:
Single-blinded,
parallel-group, randomized trial.
110 ession (leuprolide) then received 1 month of
single-blind (
participant only) placebo and then 3 month
111 We did a multicentre,
single-blind,
patient-level, parallel, randomised contro
112 54 (0.018 mg/kg) for 6 consecutive days in a
single-blind (
patients masked), placebo-controlled study
113 A randomized
single-blind phase 2 clinical drug trial conducted betwe
114 ised, parallel-group, comparator-controlled,
single-blind phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy of
115 At the end of this
single-blind phase, patients were randomly assigned plac
116 This randomized, controlled, multicenter,
single blind,
phase II trial examined the combination of
117 We did this
single-blind,
phase 2, randomised controlled trial (SUPE
118 s were scanned while medication free after a
single-blind placebo and after fenfluramine hydrochlorid
119 optimise risk factor and glycaemic control (
single-blind placebo in the final month).
120 A 1-week
single-blind placebo lead-in phase preceded 8 weeks of r
121 After a 2-week,
single-blind placebo lead-in phase, 81 outpatients with
122 Following a 2-week,
single-blind placebo lead-in phase, drug-free subjects w
123 vere PMS, remained eligible after 1 month of
single-blind placebo lead-in treatment, and were randoml
124 ernight fluid deprivation, patients received
single-blind placebo on day -1 (baseline) and double-bli
125 One responded to an initial 1-week
single-blind placebo period, and 22 were subsequently ra
126 After a 4-week
single-blind placebo plus diet (600 kcal/d deficit) run-
127 After a 2-week
single-blind placebo run-in period, patients were random
128 After a 2-week,
single-blind placebo run-in, 652 patients were randomize
129 e eating scale scores >/= 19 received 1-week
single-blind placebo run-in, and were then randomized to
130 x men with stable angina completed a 2-week,
single-blind placebo run-in, followed by double-blind ra
131 After a 2-week
single-blind placebo run-in, patients were randomly assi
132 After
single-blind placebo treatment for 1 week, subjects were
133 After 1 week of
single-blind placebo treatment, patients were randomized
134 or 24 months followed by a 2-month period of
single-blind placebo treatment.
135 One-week
single-blind placebo was followed by randomized double-b
136 ek treatment period was followed by a 6-week
single-blind placebo washout period.
137 In part 2, after a 4-week,
single-blind placebo washout, continuing subjects were r
138 ted the baseline study, and 26 completed the
single-blind placebo week.
139 After one menstrual cycle of
single-blind placebo, participants were randomized to re
140 After 1 lead-in week of
single-blind placebo, patients were randomly assigned to
141 After 2 weeks of
single-blind placebo, patients were randomly assigned to
142 In a
single-blind placebo-controlled cross-over design, all p
143 autonomic dysfunction and inflammation in a
single-blind placebo-controlled crossover pilot trial.
144 e on antioxidant and glucose parameters in a
single-blind placebo-controlled crossover study was inve
145 Single-blind placebo-controlled DPT was carried out in t
146 After confirming the diagnosis, a
single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation test wa
147 day) and fenofibrate (FFB) (160 mg/day) in a
single-blind placebo-controlled study design.
148 placebo augmentation, followed by 2 weeks of
single-blind placebo.
149 ast 2 weeks, eszopiclone was replaced with a
single-blind placebo.
150 treatment periods were followed by a 14-day
single-blinded placebo follow-up period.
151 Study 1 (n = 17) was a 2-wk
single-blinded placebo pill trial.
152 2- to 12-week washout period, and a 4-week,
single-blind,
placebo lead-in period, patients with base
153 igned 214 men who were undergoing a 1-month,
single-blind,
placebo run-in period during an existing c
154 ice daily) for 12 weeks, following a 2-week,
single-blind,
placebo run-in period.
155 s per day]) were randomized (after a 3-week,
single-blind,
placebo, run-in period) to 1 of 3 parallel
156 This investigator-initiated, multicenter,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled crossover clinical tria
157 In this
single-blind,
placebo-controlled crossover study, 16 par
158 Twenty normal-weight women were tested in a
single-blind,
placebo-controlled experiment.
159 Single-blind,
placebo-controlled oral provocation tests
160 Single-blind,
placebo-controlled provocation tests (SBPC
161 We conducted a
single-blind,
placebo-controlled study to examine the ef
162 n this multicentre phase 1b, first-in-human,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assi
163 GN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, 5-treatment, parallel-
164 METHODS AND This was a
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, crossover, randomized
165 This was a
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, crossover, randomized
166 We did a
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study
167 This was a randomized,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, parallel-group study o
168 We did a randomised,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, phase 1 dose-escalatio
169 We did this randomised,
single-blind,
placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial at 25 si
170 A randomized,
single-blinded,
placebo-controlled trial was performed o
171 We undertook a
single-blind pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
172 METHODS AND A
single-blind,
pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT
173 We conducted a
single-blind,
pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled t
174 We did a
single-blind,
pragmatic, comparative effectiveness, clus
175 : This randomized
single-blinded prospective trial allocated 20 surgical t
176 This
single-blinded prospective trial randomized 16 novice su
177 Phase 3
single-blind,
prospective randomized controlled trial, 1
178 In this randomized,
single-blind,
prospective study, 680 adults who had not
179 PPI) therapy were entered into a randomized,
single-blind,
prospective, multicenter trial.
180 We did a single centre,
single-blind,
prospective, randomised pilot trial at the
181 We conducted a
single-blind,
prospective, randomized trial with 128 men
182 measurements were repeated on a placebo day (
single-blind protocol, randomized sequence).
183 0 mg over 30 min) on separate occasions in a
single-blind,
random order, crossover design.
184 We did a
single-blind randomised controlled trial at two UK centr
185 In this
single-blind randomised controlled trial, consecutive st
186 A
single-blind randomised trial of the comparison of 12 se
187 In this
single-blind randomised trial, we enrolled consecutive a
188 A phase IV, 12-month,
single-blinded randomised (MRI) study.
189 We did a
single-blinded randomised controlled study to establish
190 We did a
single-blind,
randomised clinical trial in 16 neighbourh
191 We did this
single-blind,
randomised controlled trial (OASIS) at 26
192 We did this
single-blind,
randomised controlled trial at a single cl
193 We designed a
single-blind,
randomised controlled trial in two teachin
194 In COMMAND, a
single-blind,
randomised controlled trial, eligible part
195 In this cluster-design,
single-blind,
randomised controlled trial, we included g
196 In the phase 1,
single-blind,
randomised trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in the USA
197 In this
single-blind,
randomised trial, undertaken in the UK, sm
198 We did a
single-blind,
randomised, controlled trial to assess the
199 A
single-blind,
randomised, controlled trial was undertake
200 We did a multicentre,
single-blind,
randomised, controlled trial with follow-u
201 EQoL-MDS was a
single-blind,
randomised, controlled, phase 2 superiorit
202 In this
single-blind,
randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority t
203 We did a
single-blind,
randomised, placebo controlled, cross-over
204 TN-OFF MED was a multicentre, international,
single-blind,
randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-conc
205 We did a multicentre,
single-blinded,
randomised controlled trial at six centr
206 Single-blind randomization to insertion of 2 gentamicin-
207 We performed a
single-blind randomized clinical trial from April 24, 20
208 A
single-blind randomized clinical trial with 3 arms (N =
209 In this
single-blind randomized clinical trial, 8003 adults with
210 Single-blind randomized clinical trial, conducted betwee
211 A
single-blind randomized controlled clinical trial was co
212 In this
single-blind randomized controlled trial, participants w
213 A
single-blind randomized crossover design was used.
214 Phase 3, pragmatic,
single-blind randomized trial among 361 participants wit
215 Single-blind randomized trial conducted from February 20
216 In this large-scale, prospective,
single-blind randomized trial, a novel PtCr-EES was noni
217 The authors conducted a
single-blinded randomized clinical trial and assigned a
218 This study is a
single-blinded randomized clinical trial.
219 This prospective,
single-blinded randomized controlled trial allocated 25
220 A
single-blinded randomized controlled trial in children (
221 This prospective
single-blinded randomized trial allocated 24 surgical re
222 The TRYTON (Prospective,
Single Blind,
Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate th
223 (Prospective,
Single Blind,
Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate th
224 Dynamic Overdrive Pacing Trial (ADOPT) was a
single blind,
randomized, controlled study to evaluate t
225 An institutional review board-approved,
single blinded,
randomized controlled trial was conducte
226 DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A
single-blind,
randomized clinical trial of 61 adolescent
227 Design, Setting, and Participants: A
single-blind,
randomized clinical trial of ED-initiated
228 ssages (TEXT ME) trial was a parallel-group,
single-blind,
randomized clinical trial that recruited 7
229 A multicenter,
single-blind,
randomized clinical trial was conducted fr
230 The objective of this multisite,
single-blind,
randomized clinical trial was to test whet
231 This was a
single-blind,
randomized controlled clinical trial.
232 The aim of this study was to conduct a
single-blind,
randomized controlled intervention trial w
233 n intensive care units [ICUs]), prospective,
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial involving 400
234 DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial of 25 US healt
235 We conducted a prospective,
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial of 40 individu
236 A
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial was conducted.
237 The study design was a parallel-group,
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial.
238 The authors performed a multicenter,
single-blind,
randomized controlled trial.
239 cebo for 28 d with the use of a dual-center,
single-blind,
randomized crossover design.
240 In this
single-blind,
randomized trial conducted at 54 sites, we
241 We conducted a
single-blind,
randomized trial of classic Yang-style tai
242 We conducted two
single-blind,
randomized trials comparing a genotype-gui
243 The study was an 8-wk,
single-blind,
randomized, controlled isocaloric trial wi
244 nd Activity Promotion Trial was an 18-month,
single-blind,
randomized, controlled trial comparing the
245 We conducted a
single-blind,
randomized, controlled trial in 14 primary
246 losartan 50 mg on 2 separate occasions in a
single-blind,
randomized, crossover design.
247 A
single-blind,
randomized, crossover study was conducted
248 In a
single-blind,
randomized, crossover study, 10 insulin-re
249 A
single-blind,
randomized, placebo-controlled study was c
250 We designed a prospective,
single-blind,
randomized, sham-controlled trial.
251 A
single-blind,
randomized, within-subject crossover desig
252 Patients (CHAMPION) trial was a prospective,
single-blinded,
randomized controlled clinical trial tes
253 ACT SFA Trial is a prospective, multicenter,
single-blinded,
randomized trial in which 331 patients w
254 n-smoking control subjects participated in a
single-blinded,
randomized, 2-phase crossover study.
255 We conducted a
single-blinded,
randomized, controlled trial comparing h
256 Single-blinded rating of the exenatide group suggested c
257 Participants completed a 1-week,
single-blind run-in of placebo, then were randomly assig
258 ized, placebo-controlled study with a 2-week
single-blind run-in period to determine baseline severit
259 After a
single-blind run-in period, we assigned patients, in a d
260 bset of 10 521 patients entering sequential,
single-blind run-in periods (enalapril 10 mg twice daily
261 es of inhaled corticosteroids during a 2-wk,
single-blind,
run-in period were randomized to treatment
262 misphere) was tested in a series of separate
single-blind,
Sham-controlled crossover trials, each inc
263 herapy II (MNPDT-II) study was a randomized,
single-blinded,
split-face controlled, 2-arm clinical tr
264 TTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, controlled,
single-blind study conducted between January 2, 2006, an
265 ontitis were entered into a parallel design,
single-blind study of 6 months' duration.
266 We performed a multi-center, parallel,
single-blind study of 75 patients who met Rome III crite
267 In a
single-blind study performed at 2 referral centers we as
268 In total, 52 methods were used in the
single-blind study to determine method accuracy and comp
269 A controlled,
single-blind study was designed to measure the effect of
270 In a prospective, single-center,
single-blind study, 44 (of 139 screened, 31.7%) ACS pati
271 In a prospective, single-center,
single-blind study, 55 out of 117 (47%) screened consecu
272 re enrolled in this prospective, randomized,
single-blind study, employing a split-scalp design, comp
273 a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover,
single-blinded study (subject) placebo once and 3.0 pmol
274 o August 2015, this randomized, prospective,
single-blinded study compared 2 groups (a TAP block and
275 ) is a multicenter, prospective, randomized,
single-blinded study designed to demonstrate a reduction
276 aged 6 mo were enrolled in this randomized,
single-blinded study for 9 mo, designed primarily to ass
277 A prospective, single-center, randomized,
single-blinded study from July 2009 through February 201
278 This prospective, multicenter,
single-blinded study of 232 patients (age 53 +/- 10 year
279 We performed a prospective,
single-blinded study to explore the reliability of body
280 Nonrandomized,
single-blinded study using an interrupted time-series de
281 In this randomized,
single-blinded study, EECP improved exercise tolerance,
282 imia nervosa, purging type, were assigned to
single-blind treatment with 60 mg/day of fluoxetine.
283 Study 2 consisted of 9 weeks of
single-blind treatment with rilonacept (part A), followe
284 he ANOSEAN study was a randomized controlled
single-blind trial (CPP 2009-A00346-51).
285 s at baseline, 232 completed 52 weeks of the
single-blind trial and met response criteria.
286 As a proof of concept, using a
single-blind trial design, we evaluated the progress of
287 eria for response after 16 and 52 weeks of a
single-blind trial of sertraline were randomly assigned
288 We undertook a
single-blind trial to assess this approach.
289 We conducted an exploratory, randomized,
single-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety o
290 A prospective, randomized, controlled,
single-blind trial was conducted where 98 participants w
291 In a
single-blind trial, 106 individuals with TMJ closed lock
292 Pilot
single-blind trial.
293 N=674) who had participated in a randomized,
single-blinded trial of an undiluted or a 1 : 5 or 1 : 1
294 was a prospective, randomized, multicenter,
single-blinded trial.
295 n 40 patients with diabetes in a randomized,
single-blind,
triple-crossover study.
296 We did a
single-blind,
two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled tri
297 NATE Pivotal Study (Prospective, Randomized,
Single-Blind,
U.S. Multi-Center Study to Evaluate Treatm
298 We conducted a
single-blind,
unmatched, cluster-randomized intervention
299 e daily for 6 months followed by 6 months of
single-blind Val in both groups.
300 We conducted a
single-blinded,
wait-list randomized controlled trial of