Protocol 1 assessed the response to inhaled revatropate (1, 2 and 7 mg) using a blinded, negative (inhaled saline) and positive (inhaled ipratropium bromide; 0.3, 0.7 and 2 mg) controlled, dose escalation study, with six heaves horses.
By using a blinded procedure, we could avoid the usual bias inherent in retrospective evaluation.
Control subjects (n = 176), who were identified with the use of a blinded protocol, included women who were delivered vaginally with less than or equal to a second-degree perineal injury.
This flaw would be mitigated when using the WHO "Method 2" to compare two different products using a randomized blinded protocol.
This suggested a strong placebo effect, in part due to the strict selection of patients, the delivery method used (intramuscular injection can increase the production of growth factors), or a possible bias by lack of a blinded protocol.
All histologic assessments were performed in a blinded protocol.
Both studies used a blinded computer-based randomization system, hence having low risk for selection bias.
ALBIOS [ 9] used a blinded assignment sequence.
Blinded whole-blood samples were transported, using a validated shipping protocol, overnight in a blinded fashion to the University of Washington, Seattle, WA, for T-cell analysis (10, 11).
In an outpatient clinic in a primary care setting 32 patients with at least 2 weeks of pain and/or stiffness in the neck were randomly assessed, in a test- retest design with blinded raters using a standardized measurement protocol.
Biopsies were taken using a standardized protocol.
