Editing Blinded experiment (section)

====Acupuncture====

While the possibility of blinded trials on [[acupuncture]] is controversial, a 2003 review of 47 [[randomized controlled trial]]s found no fewer than four methods of blinding patients to acupuncture treatment: 1) superficial needling of true acupuncture points, 2) use of acupuncture points which are not indicated for the condition being treated, 3) insertion of needles outside of true acupuncture points, and 4) the use of placebo needles which are designed not to penetrate the skin. The authors concluded that there was "no clear association between type of sham intervention used and the results of the trials."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dincer |first1=F |last2=Linde |first2=K. |title=Sham interventions in randomized clinical trials of acupuncture—a review |journal=Complementary Therapies in Medicine |date=December 2003 |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=235–242 |doi=10.1016/S0965-2299(03)00124-9 |pmid=15022656 |language=en}}</ref>

A 2018 study on acupuncture which used needles that did not penetrate the skin as a sham treatment found that 68% of patients and 83% of acupuncturists correctly identified their group allocation. The authors concluded that the blinding had failed, but that more advanced placebos may someday offer the possibility of well-blinded studies in acupuncture.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vase |first1=L |last2=Baram |first2=S |last3=Takakura |first3=N |last4=Takayama |first4=M |last5=Yajima |first5=H |last6=Kawase |first6=A |last7=Schuster |first7=L |last8=Kaptchuk |first8=TJ |last9=Schou |first9=S |last10=Jensen |first10=TS |last11=Zachariae |first11=R |last12=Svensson |first12=P |title=Can acupuncture treatment be double-blinded? An evaluation of double-blind acupuncture treatment of postoperative pain. |journal=PLOS ONE |date=2015 |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=e0119612 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0119612 |pmid=25747157 |pmc=4352029 |issn=1932-6203|bibcode=2015PLoSO..1019612V |doi-access=free }}</ref>