{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

placebo-powerless - NEPRINTAT

placebo-powerless - NEPRINTAT - Journal of Internal...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
REVIEW Is the placebo powerless? Update of a systematic review with 52 new randomized trials comparing placebo with no treatment A. HRO ´ BJARTSSON & P. C. GØTZSCHE From The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark Abstract. Hro ´bjartsson A, Gøtzsche PC (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark). Is the placebo powerless? Update of a systematic review with 52 new randomized trials comparing placebo with no treatment (Review). J Intern Med 2004; 256 : 91–100. Background. It is widely believed that placebo interventions induce powerful effects. We could not confirm this in a systematic review of 114 randomized trials that compared placebo-treated with untreated patients. Aim. To study whether a new sample of trials would reproduce our earlier findings, and to update the review. Methods. Systematic review of trials that were published since our last search (or not previously identified), and of all available trials. Results. Data was available in 42 out of 52 new trials (3212 patients). The results were similar to our previous findings. The updated review summarizes data from 156 trials (11 737 patients). We found no statistically significant pooled effect in 38 trials with binary outcomes, relative risk 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.89–1.01). The effect on continuous outcomes decreased with increasing sample size, and there was considerable variation in effect also between large trials; the effect estimates should therefore be interpreted cautiously. If this bias is disregarded, the pooled standardized mean difference in 118 trials with continuous outcomes was ) 0.24 ( ) 0.31 to ) 0.17). For trials with patient-reported outcomes the effect was ) 0.30 ( ) 0.38 to ) 0.21), but only ) 0.10 ( ) 0.20 to 0.01) for trials with observer- reported outcomes. Of 10 clinical conditions investigated in three trials or more, placebo had a statistically significant pooled effect only on pain or phobia on continuous scales. Conclusion. We found no evidence of a generally large effect of placebo interventions. A possible small effect on patient-reported continuous outcomes, especially pain, could not be clearly distinguished from bias. Keywords: meta-analysis, pain, placebo effect, placebos, systematic review. Background Within a few years in the 1950s it became a common conception that effects of placebo interven- tions were large, and that numerous randomized trials had reliably documented these effects in a wide range of clinical conditions. To a considerable extent this prevailing opinion was caused by a paper by Beecher ‘The Powerful Placebo’ [1]. However, in 1997, Kienle and Kiene showed that Beecher’s influential paper was flawed [2]. Beecher, and the vast majority of placebo investigators, had not Journal of Internal Medicine 2004; 256 : 91–100 Ó 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd 91
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
compared patients randomized to a placebo-treated group and to an untreated group. Instead the effect had been estimated as the uncontrolled before–after difference in a placebo group in a randomized trial, which fails to distinguish the effect of placebo from spontaneous remission, and other factors [3].
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 10

placebo-powerless - NEPRINTAT - Journal of Internal...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online