My wife bought new toothbrush heads on her way home from work today.

They didn’t fit. She bought the “Oral B IO” heads, but we have a “regular” Oral B toothbrush, not the Shiny Fancy IO design.

And this is after she bought replacement heads last week at another store – which turned out to be “compatible for” a different brand :(

Ugh.

  • iamthetot@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Decided to do some reading!

    CONSORT guidelines state that these terms should no longer be used because they are ambiguous. For instance, “double-blind” may mean that the data analysts and patients were blinded; the patients and outcome assessors were blinded; or the patients and those administering the intervention were blinded. The terms also fail to convey the information that was masked and the extent of unblinding. It is not sufficient to specify the number of parties that have been blinded. To describe an experiment’s blinding, it is necessary to report who has been blinded to what information, and how well each blind succeeded.

    So double blind doesn’t have to mean the researchers or even the participants were blinded, just that two parties were.

    In this specific study, I think it’s that the data analysts were not aware of which groups the data came from.