This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Metabolic Diseases  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine  • Psychiatry  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Paul-Labrador et al¹ conducted a randomized controlled trial of transcendental meditation (TM) vs health education to determine the benefits of meditation on components of the metabolic syndrome in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). The authors correctly identified a number of limitations of their study. However, I wish to point out an important limitation that they did not discuss. In a study of this nature, patients with an interest or belief in meditation are more likely to consent to participate; thus, the sample is likely to be biased toward meditation from the outset. This, coupled with the impossibility of patient blinding to treatment allocation, is likely to magnify the placebo response in the meditation group and correspondingly diminish the treatment response in the control group.

The proper sampling procedure for studies in which patient blinding is impossible is to recruit only those subjects who are neutral in their attitudes toward . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Chittaranjan Andrade, MD

RELATED LETTER

Why Meditate When You Could Just Rest?
Raj Dhwarka Persaud
Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(22):2553.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT