Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

The matching quality of experimental and control interventions in blinded pharmacological randomised clinical trials: a methodological systematic review

Authors: Segun Bello, Maoling Wei, Jørgen Hilden, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Blinding is a pivotal method to avoid bias in randomised clinical trials. In blinded drug trials, experimental and control interventions are often designed to be matched, i.e. to appear indistinguishable. It is unknown how often matching procedures are inadequate, so we decided to systematically identify and analyse studies of matching quality in drug trials. Our primary objective was to assess the proportion of studies that concluded that the matching was inadequate; our secondary objective was to describe mechanisms for inadequate matching.

Methods

Systematic review. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and Web of Science Citation Index for studies that assessed whether supposedly indistinguishable interventions (experimental and control) in randomized clinical drug trials could be distinguished based on physical properties (e.g. appearance or smell). Two persons decided on study eligibility and extracted data independently. Our primary analysis was based on the conclusions of each study. In supportive analyses, we defined a low and a high threshold for inadequate matching. We summarised results qualitatively.

Results

We included studies of 36 trials, of which 28 (78 %) were published before 1977. The studies differed considerably with regard to design, methodology and analysis. Sixteen of the 36 studies (44 %) concluded inadequate matching. When we adapted high or low thresholds for inadequate matching, the number of trials with inadequate matching was reduced to 12 (33 %) or increased to 26 (72 %). Inadequate matching was concluded in 7 of 22 trials (32 %) based on a defined cohort of trials. Inadequate matching was concluded in 9 of 14 trials (64 %) which were not based on a trial cohort, and therefore at a higher risk of publication bias. The proportion of inadequate matching did not seem to depend on publication year. Typical mechanisms of inadequate matching were differences in taste or colour.

Conclusion

We identified matching quality studies of 36 randomized clinical drug trials. Sixteen of the 36 studies (44 %) concluded inadequate matching. Few studies of matching quality in contemporary trials have been published, but show similar results as found for older trials. Inadequate matching in drug trials may be more prevalent than commonly believed.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomised trials. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:254–9.CrossRefPubMed Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomised trials. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:254–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I. Blinding in randomized clinical trials: imposed impartiality. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90(5):732–6.CrossRefPubMed Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I. Blinding in randomized clinical trials: imposed impartiality. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90(5):732–6.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Savović J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jüni P, Pildal J, et al. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(6):429–38.CrossRefPubMed Savović J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jüni P, Pildal J, et al. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(6):429–38.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, Tendal B, Hilden J, Boutron I, et al. Observer bias in randomised clinical trials with binary outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. BMJ. 2012;344:e1119.CrossRefPubMed Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, Tendal B, Hilden J, Boutron I, et al. Observer bias in randomised clinical trials with binary outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. BMJ. 2012;344:e1119.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, Tendal B, Hilden J, Boutron I, et al. Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with measurement scale outcomes: a systematic review of trials with both blinded and nonblinded assessors. CMAJ. 2013. doi:10.1503/cmaj.120744.PubMedPubMedCentral Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, Tendal B, Hilden J, Boutron I, et al. Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with measurement scale outcomes: a systematic review of trials with both blinded and nonblinded assessors. CMAJ. 2013. doi:10.​1503/​cmaj.​120744.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, et al. Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. Int J Epidemiol. 2014. doi:10.1093/ije/dyt270.PubMedCentral Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, et al. Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. Int J Epidemiol. 2014. doi:10.​1093/​ije/​dyt270.PubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Hróbjartsson A, Emanuelsson F, Thomsen ASS, Hilden J, Brorson S. Bias due to lack of patient blinding in clinical trials. A systematic review of trials randomizing patients to blind and nonblind sub-studies. Int J Epidemiol 2014; doi:10.1093/ije/dyu115. Hróbjartsson A, Emanuelsson F, Thomsen ASS, Hilden J, Brorson S. Bias due to lack of patient blinding in clinical trials. A systematic review of trials randomizing patients to blind and nonblind sub-studies. Int J Epidemiol 2014; doi:10.​1093/​ije/​dyu115.
8.
go back to reference Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomized trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet. 2005;365(9465):1159–62.CrossRefPubMed Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomized trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet. 2005;365(9465):1159–62.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Boutron I, Estellat C, Guittet L, Dechartres A, Sackett DL, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2006;3(10):e425.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Boutron I, Estellat C, Guittet L, Dechartres A, Sackett DL, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2006;3(10):e425.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Hien TT, Dung NT, Truong NT, Van NTT, Chau TNB, Hoang NVM, et al. A randomised trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of the novel single oral dose typhoid vaccine M01ZH09 in healthy Vietnamese children. PLoS One. 2010;5(7):e11778.CrossRefPubMedCentral Hien TT, Dung NT, Truong NT, Van NTT, Chau TNB, Hoang NVM, et al. A randomised trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of the novel single oral dose typhoid vaccine M01ZH09 in healthy Vietnamese children. PLoS One. 2010;5(7):e11778.CrossRefPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Eby GA, Davis DR, Halcomb WW. Reduction in duration of common cold by zinc gluconate lozenges in a double-blind study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984;25:20–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Eby GA, Davis DR, Halcomb WW. Reduction in duration of common cold by zinc gluconate lozenges in a double-blind study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984;25:20–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Farr BM, Gwaltney Jr JM. The problems of taste in placebo matching: an evaluation of zinc gluconate for the common cold. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(9):875–9.CrossRefPubMed Farr BM, Gwaltney Jr JM. The problems of taste in placebo matching: an evaluation of zinc gluconate for the common cold. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(9):875–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Fai CK, Qi GD, Wei DA, Chung LP. Placebo preparation for the proper clinical trials of herbal medicine–requirements, verification and quality control. Recent Patents Inflamm Allergy Drug Discov. 2011;5:169–74.CrossRef Fai CK, Qi GD, Wei DA, Chung LP. Placebo preparation for the proper clinical trials of herbal medicine–requirements, verification and quality control. Recent Patents Inflamm Allergy Drug Discov. 2011;5:169–74.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Walter SD, Awasthi S, Jeyaseelan L. Pre-trial evaluation of the potential for unblinding in drug trials: a prototype example. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2005;26:459–68.CrossRefPubMed Walter SD, Awasthi S, Jeyaseelan L. Pre-trial evaluation of the potential for unblinding in drug trials: a prototype example. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2005;26:459–68.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Hill LE, Ninn AJ. Matching quality of agents employed in “double-blind” controlled clinical trials. Lancet. 1976;1:352–6.CrossRefPubMed Hill LE, Ninn AJ. Matching quality of agents employed in “double-blind” controlled clinical trials. Lancet. 1976;1:352–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Blumenthal DS, Burke R, Shapiro AK. The validity of “identical matching placebos”. JAMA Psychiatry. 1974;31(2):214. Blumenthal DS, Burke R, Shapiro AK. The validity of “identical matching placebos”. JAMA Psychiatry. 1974;31(2):214.
18.
go back to reference Dupin-Spriet T, Spriet A. Jury of resemblance. Drug Information Journal. 1993;27:135–43. Dupin-Spriet T, Spriet A. Jury of resemblance. Drug Information Journal. 1993;27:135–43.
19.
go back to reference Wen Z, Wang Q, Liang W, Lai S. Application of blind method in double-blind randomized controlled trial of Shengmai capsule for chronic heart failure. J Guangzhou Uni Tradit Chi Med. 2004;21(4):315–22. Wen Z, Wang Q, Liang W, Lai S. Application of blind method in double-blind randomized controlled trial of Shengmai capsule for chronic heart failure. J Guangzhou Uni Tradit Chi Med. 2004;21(4):315–22.
20.
go back to reference Argawal G, Awasthi S, Kabra SK, Kaul A, Singhi S, Walter SD, et al. Three day versus five day treatment weith amoxicillin for non-severe pneumonia in young children: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2004;328:791.CrossRef Argawal G, Awasthi S, Kabra SK, Kaul A, Singhi S, Walter SD, et al. Three day versus five day treatment weith amoxicillin for non-severe pneumonia in young children: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2004;328:791.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Sieveking DP, Woo KS, Fung KP, Lundman P, Nakhla S, Celermajer DS. Chinese herbs Danshen and Gegen modulate key early atherogenic events in vitro. Int J Cardiol. 2005;105:40–5.CrossRefPubMed Sieveking DP, Woo KS, Fung KP, Lundman P, Nakhla S, Celermajer DS. Chinese herbs Danshen and Gegen modulate key early atherogenic events in vitro. Int J Cardiol. 2005;105:40–5.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Farr BM, Conner EM, Betts RF, Oleske J, Minnefor A, Gwaltney Jr JM. Two randomized controlled trials of zinc gluconate lozenge therapy of experimentally induced rhinovirus colds. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987;31(8):1183–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Farr BM, Conner EM, Betts RF, Oleske J, Minnefor A, Gwaltney Jr JM. Two randomized controlled trials of zinc gluconate lozenge therapy of experimentally induced rhinovirus colds. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987;31(8):1183–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haarh MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trial: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291(20):2457–65.CrossRefPubMed Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haarh MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trial: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291(20):2457–65.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Tsukayama H, Yamashita H, Kimura T, Otsuki K. Factors that influence the applicability of sham needle in acupuncture trials: two randomized, single-blind, crossover trials with acupuncture-experienced subjects. Clin J Pain. 2006;22(4):346–9.CrossRefPubMed Tsukayama H, Yamashita H, Kimura T, Otsuki K. Factors that influence the applicability of sham needle in acupuncture trials: two randomized, single-blind, crossover trials with acupuncture-experienced subjects. Clin J Pain. 2006;22(4):346–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference White P, Lewith G, Hopwood V, Prescott P. The placebo needle, is it a valid and convincing placebo for use in acupuncture trials? A randomised, single-blind, cross-over pilot trials. Pain. 2003;106(3):401–9.CrossRefPubMed White P, Lewith G, Hopwood V, Prescott P. The placebo needle, is it a valid and convincing placebo for use in acupuncture trials? A randomised, single-blind, cross-over pilot trials. Pain. 2003;106(3):401–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Streitberger K, Kleinhenz J. Introducing a placebo needle into acupuncture research. Lancet. 1998;352(9125):364–5.CrossRefPubMed Streitberger K, Kleinhenz J. Introducing a placebo needle into acupuncture research. Lancet. 1998;352(9125):364–5.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Takakura N, Yajima H. A placebo acupuncture needle with potential for double blinding–a validation study. Acupunct Med. 2008;26(4):224–30.CrossRefPubMed Takakura N, Yajima H. A placebo acupuncture needle with potential for double blinding–a validation study. Acupunct Med. 2008;26(4):224–30.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference World Health Organization. Good manufacturing practices for pharmaceutical products: main principles. WHO Technical Report. 2003;908(4):36–89. World Health Organization. Good manufacturing practices for pharmaceutical products: main principles. WHO Technical Report. 2003;908(4):36–89.
30.
go back to reference World Health Organization. Good manufacturing practices: supplementary guidelines for the manufacture of investigational pharmaceutical products for clinical trials in humans. WHO Technical Report. 1996;863(7):97–108. World Health Organization. Good manufacturing practices: supplementary guidelines for the manufacture of investigational pharmaceutical products for clinical trials in humans. WHO Technical Report. 1996;863(7):97–108.
31.
go back to reference Food and Drug Administration. Guideline on the preparation of investigational new drug products (human and animal). 1991. Food and Drug Administration. Guideline on the preparation of investigational new drug products (human and animal). 1991.
32.
go back to reference Health Canada. Good manufacturing practices guidelines drugs used in clinical trials. Annex 13. 2009. Health Canada. Good manufacturing practices guidelines drugs used in clinical trials. Annex 13. 2009.
Metadata
Title
The matching quality of experimental and control interventions in blinded pharmacological randomised clinical trials: a methodological systematic review
Authors
Segun Bello
Maoling Wei
Jørgen Hilden
Asbjørn Hróbjartsson
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0111-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2016 Go to the issue