Salīdzināt metodes

	Vienlaicīgs vienpusēji akls eksperiments ar vairākām grupām	Vienkāršs vienpusēji akls kontrolēts pētījums
Nozare	Eksperimentu plānošana	Eksperimentu plānošana
Saime	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Izcelsmes gads	Mid-to-late 20th century	1948 (formalized); single-blind variant established in mid-20th century clinical trial methodology
Autors	Developed within the clinical trials tradition; formalized by Friedman, Furberg, and DeMets and others in the 20th century	Bradford Hill and colleagues (MRC streptomycin trial, 1948); blinding conventions codified in CONSORT guidelines
Tips	Controlled experimental design	Experimental design — blinded randomized trial
Pirmavots	Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., & DeMets, D. L. (2010). Fundamentals of Clinical Trials (4th ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-1441915849	Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340, c332.
Citi nosaukumi	single-masked multi-arm trial, single-blind multi-group experiment, unidirectional blinding multi-arm design, SB-MAT	single-masked RCT, single-blind RCT, single-blind trial, SB-RCT
Saistītās	5	5
Kopsavilkums	A single-blind multi-arm experiment is a controlled experimental design that simultaneously compares three or more treatment conditions while blinding participants — but not investigators — to their group assignment. This configuration reduces response bias driven by participants' expectations, preserves operational feasibility when full blinding is impractical, and allows direct pairwise and omnibus comparisons across multiple arms within a single study.	A single-blind randomized controlled trial (SB-RCT) is a rigorous experimental design in which participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions while remaining unaware of which condition they have received. Investigators, outcome assessors, and data analysts are not blinded. By masking participants, the design eliminates placebo and nocebo response biases on the participant side, while preserving investigator flexibility to administer and monitor the intervention.