TY - JOUR
T1 - How blind is blind? Assessment of patient and doctor medication guesses in a placebo-controlled trial of imipramine and phenelzine
AU - Rabkin, Judith G.
AU - Markowitz, Jeffrey S.
AU - Stewart, Jonathan
AU - McGrath, Patrick
AU - Harrison, Wilma
AU - Quitkin, Frederic M.
AU - Klein, Donald F.
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments. The authors thank Donald Ross, Ph.D., for statistical consultation and Fay Willens and Miosotis Martinez for their help in manuscript preparation. This work was supported in part by Mental Health Clinical Research Center grant MH-30906-07.
PY - 1986/9
Y1 - 1986/9
N2 - The purpose of the double blind is to protect the internal validity of a clinical trial by preventing knowledge of treatment conditions from influencing outcome or its assessment. We studied medication guesses of 137 depressed patients and/or their doctors at the end of a 6-week randomized trial of placebo, imipramine, and phenelzine. Overall, 78% of the patients and 87% of the doctors correctly distinguished between placebo and active medication. Clinical outcome, treatment condition, and their interaction each contributed to guessing accuracy, while medication experience and side effects assessed only in week 6 did not. Accuracy was high, however, even when cases were stratified for clinical outcome, indicating that other cues were available to the patients and doctors. These may include patterns and timing of side effects and clinical response not detectable in this end-point analysis.
AB - The purpose of the double blind is to protect the internal validity of a clinical trial by preventing knowledge of treatment conditions from influencing outcome or its assessment. We studied medication guesses of 137 depressed patients and/or their doctors at the end of a 6-week randomized trial of placebo, imipramine, and phenelzine. Overall, 78% of the patients and 87% of the doctors correctly distinguished between placebo and active medication. Clinical outcome, treatment condition, and their interaction each contributed to guessing accuracy, while medication experience and side effects assessed only in week 6 did not. Accuracy was high, however, even when cases were stratified for clinical outcome, indicating that other cues were available to the patients and doctors. These may include patterns and timing of side effects and clinical response not detectable in this end-point analysis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022448225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0022448225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0165-1781(86)90094-6
DO - 10.1016/0165-1781(86)90094-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 3538107
AN - SCOPUS:0022448225
SN - 0165-1781
VL - 19
SP - 75
EP - 86
JO - Psychiatry Research
JF - Psychiatry Research
IS - 1
ER -