Cargando…

Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Placebos are widely used in clinical practice in spite of ethical restrictions. Whether such use is justified depends in part on the relative benefit of placebos compared to ‘active’ treatments. A direct test for differences between placebo and ‘active’ treatment effects has not been con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Howick, Jeremy, Friedemann, Claire, Tsakok, Maria, Watson, Robert, Tsakok, Teresa, Thomas, Jennifer, Perera, Rafael, Fleming, Susannah, Heneghan, Carl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3655171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23690944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062599
_version_ 1782269839047393280
author Howick, Jeremy
Friedemann, Claire
Tsakok, Maria
Watson, Robert
Tsakok, Teresa
Thomas, Jennifer
Perera, Rafael
Fleming, Susannah
Heneghan, Carl
author_facet Howick, Jeremy
Friedemann, Claire
Tsakok, Maria
Watson, Robert
Tsakok, Teresa
Thomas, Jennifer
Perera, Rafael
Fleming, Susannah
Heneghan, Carl
author_sort Howick, Jeremy
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Placebos are widely used in clinical practice in spite of ethical restrictions. Whether such use is justified depends in part on the relative benefit of placebos compared to ‘active’ treatments. A direct test for differences between placebo and ‘active’ treatment effects has not been conducted. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to test for differences between treatment and placebo effects within similar trial populations. DATA SOURCES: A Cochrane Review compared placebos with no treatment in three-armed trials (no treatment, placebo, and treatment). We added an analysis of treatment and placebo differences within the same trials. SYNTHESIS METHODS: For continuous outcomes we compared mean differences between placebo and no treatment with mean differences between treatment and placebo. For binary outcomes we compared the risk ratio for treatment benefit (versus placebo) with the risk ratio for placebo benefit (versus no treatment). We conducted several preplanned subgroup analyses: objective versus subjective outcomes, conditions tested in three or more trials, and trials with varying degrees of bias. RESULTS: In trials with continuous outcomes (n = 115) we found no difference between treatment and placebo effects (MD = −0.29, 95% CI −0.62 to 0.05, P = 0.10). In trials with binary outcomes (n = 37) treatments were significantly more effective than placebos (RRR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.61 to 0.86, P = 0.0003). Treatment and placebo effects were not different in 22 out of 28 predefined subgroup analyses. Of the six subgroups with differences treatments were more effective than placebos in five. However when all criteria for reducing bias were ruled out (continuous outcomes) placebos were more effective than treatments (MD = 1.59, 95% CI = 0.40 to 2.77, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Placebos and treatments often have similar effect sizes. Placebos with comparatively powerful effects can benefit patients either alone or as part of a therapeutic regime, and trials involving such placebos must be adequately blinded.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3655171
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36551712013-05-20 Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Howick, Jeremy Friedemann, Claire Tsakok, Maria Watson, Robert Tsakok, Teresa Thomas, Jennifer Perera, Rafael Fleming, Susannah Heneghan, Carl PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Placebos are widely used in clinical practice in spite of ethical restrictions. Whether such use is justified depends in part on the relative benefit of placebos compared to ‘active’ treatments. A direct test for differences between placebo and ‘active’ treatment effects has not been conducted. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to test for differences between treatment and placebo effects within similar trial populations. DATA SOURCES: A Cochrane Review compared placebos with no treatment in three-armed trials (no treatment, placebo, and treatment). We added an analysis of treatment and placebo differences within the same trials. SYNTHESIS METHODS: For continuous outcomes we compared mean differences between placebo and no treatment with mean differences between treatment and placebo. For binary outcomes we compared the risk ratio for treatment benefit (versus placebo) with the risk ratio for placebo benefit (versus no treatment). We conducted several preplanned subgroup analyses: objective versus subjective outcomes, conditions tested in three or more trials, and trials with varying degrees of bias. RESULTS: In trials with continuous outcomes (n = 115) we found no difference between treatment and placebo effects (MD = −0.29, 95% CI −0.62 to 0.05, P = 0.10). In trials with binary outcomes (n = 37) treatments were significantly more effective than placebos (RRR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.61 to 0.86, P = 0.0003). Treatment and placebo effects were not different in 22 out of 28 predefined subgroup analyses. Of the six subgroups with differences treatments were more effective than placebos in five. However when all criteria for reducing bias were ruled out (continuous outcomes) placebos were more effective than treatments (MD = 1.59, 95% CI = 0.40 to 2.77, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Placebos and treatments often have similar effect sizes. Placebos with comparatively powerful effects can benefit patients either alone or as part of a therapeutic regime, and trials involving such placebos must be adequately blinded. Public Library of Science 2013-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3655171/ /pubmed/23690944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062599 Text en © 2013 Howick et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Howick, Jeremy
Friedemann, Claire
Tsakok, Maria
Watson, Robert
Tsakok, Teresa
Thomas, Jennifer
Perera, Rafael
Fleming, Susannah
Heneghan, Carl
Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Are Treatments More Effective than Placebos? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort are treatments more effective than placebos? a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3655171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23690944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062599
work_keys_str_mv AT howickjeremy aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT friedemannclaire aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tsakokmaria aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT watsonrobert aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tsakokteresa aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT thomasjennifer aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pererarafael aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT flemingsusannah aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT heneghancarl aretreatmentsmoreeffectivethanplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis