This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Siemonsma, P. Articles by Walker, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Siemonsma, P. Articles by Walker, M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Practical guidelines for independent assessment in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rehabilitation

Stroke Research Unit, City Hospital Nottingham/Division of Stroke Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham

MF Walker

Stroke Research Unit, City Hospital Nottingham/Division of Stroke Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham

Objective: To provide guidelines for conducting independent assessments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rehabilitation. The article aims to assist those who plan to put independent assessment into practice and to be an introduction for those who are new to independent assessment.

Issues: Possible causes of unblinding to group allocation are discussed, such as unblinding by other people, the environment, patients and assessors themselves. Other issues discussed in this paper are bias during assessment and monitoring levels of unblinding.

Conclusion: The importance of monitoring levels of unblinding is stressed. Although it may not be possible to always keep an assessor blind in RCTs of rehabilitation, we should strive for perfection. It is therefore advocated that levels of unblinding should be reported.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 11, No. 4, 273-279 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/026921559701100402


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J L Graff, E. M M Adang, M. J M Vernooij-Dassen, J. Dekker, L Jonsson, M. Thijssen, W. H L Hoefnagels, and M. G M O. Rikkert Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study BMJ, January 19, 2008; 336(7636): 134 - 138. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J L Graff, M. J M Vernooij-Dassen, M. Thijssen, J. Dekker, W. H L Hoefnagels, and M. G M O. Rikkert Community based occupational therapy for patients with dementia and their care givers: randomised controlled trial BMJ, December 9, 2006; 333(7580): 1196 - 1196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Romberg, A. Virtanen, J. Ruutiainen, S. Aunola, S.-L. Karppi, M. Vaara, J. Surakka, T. Pohjolainen, and A. Seppanen Effects of a 6-month exercise program on patients with multiple sclerosis: A randomized study Neurology, December 14, 2004; 63(11): 2034 - 2038. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A T Lettinga, K Reynders, T H Mulder, and A Mol Pitfalls in effectiveness research: a comparative analysis of treatment goals and outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2002; 16(2): 174 - 181. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C M Wiles, R G Newcombe, K J Fuller, S Shaw, J Furnival-Doran, T P Pickersgill, and A Morgan Controlled randomised crossover trial of the effects of physiotherapy on mobility in chronic multiple sclerosis J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, February 1, 2001; 70(2): 174 - 179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Parker and M. Dewey Assessing research outcomes by postal questionnaire with telephone follow-up Int. J. Epidemiol., December 1, 2000; 29(6): 1065 - 1069. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]