ライフサイエンスコーパス: unblinded

1 day 1 (both arms administered every 21 days, unblinded).

2 polyps) missed at OC before VC results were unblinded.

3 ne and CBT with fluoxetine were administered unblinded.

4 Random assignment was unblinded.

5 ssignment; outcome assessors may have become unblinded.

6 Vaccinations were halted; participants were unblinded.

7 Massage therapists were unblinded.

8 Treatment personnel and participants were unblinded.

9 ombination with fluoxetine were administered unblinded.

10 hrough 12 weeks, after which treatments were unblinded.

11 We conducted a randomized and unblinded 2 x 2 sequential-factorial trial, composed of

12 tudy design, followed by an uncontrolled and unblinded 6-month pacing trial.

13 provement at 6-week follow-up was similar in unblinded (60%) (n = 55) and blinded (67%) (n = 57) pati

14 The study was unblinded after a planned interim analysis that was perf

15 The study was unblinded after crossing a prespecified OS futility boun

16 Ongoing patients were unblinded after final progression-free survival analysis

17 initially blinded to the findings on MRC and unblinded after withdrawal from the respective segments.

18 ent of moderate-to-severe facial acne, using unblinded and blinded assessments of disease severity.

19 Both unblinded and blinded clinical assessments of motor effe

20 ery or extended follow-up for each case were unblinded and compared with original concordant or disco

21 nsiderations often dictate that the trial be unblinded and participants be provided access to the mor

22 Motor scores improved by 66% (unblinded) and 50% (blinded) during aDBS, which were 29%

23 interpreted cautiously as these studies were unblinded, and only one was randomized.

24 The study was unblinded, and the number of patients was too small to a

25 orphology with pathology have been small and unblinded, and the vast majority assessed only the crude

26 The study assignment was unblinded as individual patients achieved a complete rem

27 e samples which were previously interpreted (unblinded) as minimally reactive by the FTA method were

28 Studies that use unblinded ascertainment of subjective infection endpoint

29 After three interim analyses, the study was unblinded at a median follow-up of 18 months, at which p

30 Patients were unblinded at M1 if there was no improvement in the FEV1.

31 Data were unblinded at the interim analysis, since these results e

32 prospective, multicenter, randomized (2:1), unblinded, Bayesian-designed study conducted at 19 hospi

33 TECT AF was a multicenter, randomized (2:1), unblinded, Bayesian-designed study conducted at 59 hospi

34 physician, and coordinator at each site were unblinded, but the the follow-up team was completely bli

35 Treatment assignment was unblinded by 24 weeks, and then patients were surveyed.

36 Finally, an unblinded clinical evaluation of 1269 euploid and aneupl

37 We conducted a dose-escalating, unblinded clinical trial involving 75 subjects aged 18-5

38 Unblinded clinical trials in multiple tumor types have s

39 d subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy.

40 es to the benefits of using both blinded and unblinded control groups when the placebo regimen may no

41 ildren (age, 1 to 15 yrs) were studied in an unblinded, crossover fashion.

42 Although observational studies using unblinded data are not a substitute for double-blind ran

43 DT fractionation can (1) distinguish between unblinded (E' known) normal versus pseudonormal age-matc

44 ib (n=207) or placebo (n=105); the trial was unblinded early when a planned interim analysis showed s

45 atients entered onto the seven completed and unblinded Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) coor

46 Mean illness duration in the blinded and unblinded echinacea groups was 6.34 and 6.76 days, respe

47 severity was 236 and 258 for the blinded and unblinded echinacea groups, respectively; 264 for the bl

48 is subjective and prone to differential (by unblinded exposure or treatment status) misclassificatio

49 State-Trait Anxiety Inventory were collected unblinded for 6 months after treatment.

50 Treatment was unblinded for patients who did not respond by week 4, wi

51 However, the overt (unblinded) format of the tests and regulatory penalties

52 ion parameters did not differentiate between unblinded groups, whereas k, c (P<0.001) and DTs, DTr (P

53 ests that a small amount of differential (by unblinded Housing Benefit status) misclassification bias

54 The study-drug assignments were unblinded in 2009, when a planned interim analysis showe

55 se transcriptase inhibitors were prematurely unblinded in the high viral load stratum; and 32% of pat

56 Blinded and unblinded interpretations of scintigraphic images were c

57 a prospective single-center, nonrandomized, unblinded investigation (Timing Based on Platelet Functi

58 one or olanzapine and followed for 1 year by unblinded investigators providing usual care.

59 When a trial is performed in an unblinded manner, however, there is the potential for bi

60 All data were collected prospectively in an unblinded manner.

61 Design, Setting, and Participants: An unblinded, monocentric, randomized clinical noninferiori

62 We conducted an unblinded, multicenter trial in which 1650 women with se

63 Once patients were unblinded, network expression declined toward baseline l

64 2012 and 30 September 2013, we conducted an unblinded non-inferiority randomized controlled trial of

65 SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multi-institutional, unblinded, nonrandomized single group phase 2 clinical t

66 Blinded versus unblinded observations had excellent correlation.

67 opping the drug were assessed by blinded and unblinded observers, by asking patients to perform simpl

68 Unblinded OC served as a reference standard.

69 The trial was unblinded on March 19, 2012, based on data monitoring co

70 hinacea pills (blinded), or echinacea pills (unblinded, open-label).

71 ur enhanced gold standard combined segmental unblinded optical colonoscopy and retrospective identifi

72 d with the use of the findings of the final, unblinded optical colonoscopy as the reference standard.

73 o-dimensional (2D) approach, with segmental, unblinded optical colonoscopy as the reference standard.

74 After 6 additional months of unblinded pacing, functional class and quality of life s

75 weeks after the last dose of chemotherapy by unblinded patient review of 5 photographs.

76 were used to compare outcome of blinded and unblinded patients.

77 rm 36 subscales were similar for blinded and unblinded patients.

78 When the trial was unblinded, patients who received placebo (PLAC) were off

79 The groups were then unblinded; patients receiving IL-12 continued for anothe

80 FORT is a prospective randomised, unblinded, phase 3 non-inferiority study comparing radio

81 Based on this small, unblinded pilot study, CTC is feasible for colorectal po

82 In the unblinded portion of the study, vomiting frequency decre

83 assignment (1:1:1) at week 6 to one of three unblinded PrEP regimens for self-administered dosing ove

84 not warrant recall as judged at blinded and unblinded radiologist review.

85 The opinion of an unblinded radiologist who separately reviewed the origin

86 Two unblinded radiologists reviewed the initial and subseque

87 inates were documented in consensus by three unblinded radiologists to create a reference standard.

88 SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based

89 lls per microL or more were enrolled in this unblinded, randomised controlled trial in Rakai District

90 In this prospective, European multicentre, unblinded, randomised study, we included women with sing

91 We did an unblinded, randomised, controlled trial assessing uptake

92 Design, Setting, and Participants: This unblinded randomized clinical trial enrolled 881 patient

93 This unblinded randomized clinical trial included 40 children

94 Unblinded randomized controlled trial (Second Therapeuti

95 RapIT (Rapid Initiation of Treatment) was an unblinded randomized controlled trial of single-visit AR

96 We performed a prospective, unblinded randomized controlled within-subject crossover

97 Unblinded randomized trial of CF-WBI (n = 149; 50.00 Gy/

98 This single-center, unblinded, randomized clinical trial compared methods of

99 A primary care, unblinded, randomized clinical trial involving 552 patie

100 hizophrenia, and blinded RCTs-in contrast to unblinded, randomized effectiveness studies-provide litt

101 METHODS AND We conducted an unblinded, randomized trial of standard ART initiation v

102 The At Home/Chez Soi project was an unblinded, randomized trial.

103 Previous unblinded, randomized trials of PTMR in patients with en

104 d specificities were calculated based on the unblinded results of colonoscopy.

105 The unblinded retrospective reading had a sensitivity of 59%

106 (c) Unblinded retrospective reading.

107 An initial unblinded review of CT colonographic image data was used

108 th a majority of blinded radiologists and by unblinded reviewers.

109 Three blinded reviewers and unblinded site investigators identified liver lesions on

110 iewed independently by 2 investigators in an unblinded standardized manner.

111 Randomisation was done by an independent, unblinded, statistician using the SAS procedure Proc Pla

112 Prior unblinded studies have suggested that catheter-based ren

113 lled patients and, probably, protocolized in unblinded studies.

114 Among the 6 open-label (unblinded) studies, we found that pacing was associated

115 studies was limited by use of an open-label, unblinded study design, and so the authors conducted a d

116 Unblinded study design, and the study may not be applica

117 immediate outcome measures were obtained by unblinded study therapists, possibly leading to reportin

118 rt failure on the basis of data from several unblinded, subjective studies.

119 dy arm with zidovudine alone was stopped and unblinded; the other two treatment arms were continued.

120 In a pilot unblinded therapeutic intervention in five patients with

121 Another radiologist unblinded to colonoscopy findings characterized the feat

122 IgG procedure was performed by technologists unblinded to results of rapid plasmid reagin (RPR) testi

123 l hematoma were reviewed by readers who were unblinded to the initial interpretations.

124 d fatty acid or placebo assignment, but were unblinded to the multidomain intervention component.

125 Subjects were unblinded to their treatment group after the 6-month pri

126 A research pharmacist unblinded to treatment strategy managed dose adjustments

127 fair to moderate (kappa 0.52, p = .028) when unblinded to troponin.

128 d) analysis of 42 subjects (30 subjects from unblinded training set and 12 additional subjects from v

129 eaknesses in studies using invalid controls, unblinded transesophageal echocardiography examinations,

130 ks, as compared with 12 weeks, the study was unblinded, treatment for all patients with genotype 3 in

131 In this phase II, unblinded trial 182 patients in 22 centers were randomly

132 Limitations include an unblinded trial and imbalanced numbers of participants,

133 In a randomized, unblinded trial conducted at 24 hemodialysis units at Ve

134 kely to be smaller and to use nonrandomized, unblinded trial designs and surrogate end points to asse

135 ted three formulations of this antigen in an unblinded trial in 46 subjects who had never been expose

136 In this randomized, controlled, unblinded trial, we sought to test Repeat Back's (RB) ef

137 d use larger block sizes, particularly in an unblinded trial.

138 ts) were enrolled in a household-randomized, unblinded trial.

139 r impossible to blind study participants and unblinded trials are common in medical research.

140 MAIN Eight unblinded trials, one randomized and seven with historic

141 s found quinolones less efficacious than did unblinded trials.

142 ials provided less evidence for benefit than unblinded trials.

143 the doors to account for placebo effects in unblinded trials.

144 ust 21, 2000; no investigator or patient was unblinded until the last patient randomized completed th

145 nd FTA-ABS positive [at an intensity of 3+], unblinded) was FTA negative with repeated testing (blind

146 Treatment assignment was unblinded when either disease progression or dose-limiti