Cargando…
Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews
OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the magnitude of the proportion attributable to contextual effects (PCE), which shows what proportion of the treatment arm response can be achieved by the placebo arm across various interventions, and to examine PCE variability by outcome type and condition...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887379/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35853683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111861 |
_version_ | 1784880330303340544 |
---|---|
author | Tsutsumi, Yusuke Tsujimoto, Yasushi Tajika, Aran Omae, Kenji Fujii, Tomoko Onishi, Akira Kataoka, Yuki Katsura, Morihiro Noma, Hisashi Sahker, Ethan Ostinelli, Edoardo Giuseppe Furukawa, Toshi A |
author_facet | Tsutsumi, Yusuke Tsujimoto, Yasushi Tajika, Aran Omae, Kenji Fujii, Tomoko Onishi, Akira Kataoka, Yuki Katsura, Morihiro Noma, Hisashi Sahker, Ethan Ostinelli, Edoardo Giuseppe Furukawa, Toshi A |
author_sort | Tsutsumi, Yusuke |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the magnitude of the proportion attributable to contextual effects (PCE), which shows what proportion of the treatment arm response can be achieved by the placebo arm across various interventions, and to examine PCE variability by outcome type and condition. DESIGN: We conducted a meta-epidemiological study. SETTING: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews with the keyword ‘placebo’ in titles, abstracts and keywords on 1 January 2020. PARTICIPANTS: We included reviews that showed statistically significant beneficial effects of the intervention over placebo for the first primary outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate PCEs based on the pooled result of each included review, grouped by outcome type and condition. The PCE quantifies how much of the observed treatment response can be achieved by the contextual effects. PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT STATEMENT: No patient or member of the public was involved in conducting this research. RESULTS: We included 328 out of 3175 Cochrane systematic reviews. The results of meta-analyses showed that PCEs varied greatly depending on outcome type (I(2)=98%) or condition (I(2)=98%), but mostly lie between 0.40 and 0.95. Overall, the PCEs were 0.65 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) on average. Subjective outcomes were 0.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.59), which was significantly smaller than those of semiobjective (PCE 0.78; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.85) or objective outcomes (PCE 0.94; 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that much of the observed benefit is not just due to the specific effect of the interventions. The specific effects of interventions may be larger for subjective outcomes than for objective or semiobjective outcomes. However, PCEs were exceptionally variable. When we evaluate the magnitude of PCEs, we should consider each PCE individually, for each condition, intervention and outcome in its context, to assess the importance of an intervention for each specific clinical setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9887379 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98873792023-02-01 Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews Tsutsumi, Yusuke Tsujimoto, Yasushi Tajika, Aran Omae, Kenji Fujii, Tomoko Onishi, Akira Kataoka, Yuki Katsura, Morihiro Noma, Hisashi Sahker, Ethan Ostinelli, Edoardo Giuseppe Furukawa, Toshi A BMJ Evid Based Med Original Research OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the magnitude of the proportion attributable to contextual effects (PCE), which shows what proportion of the treatment arm response can be achieved by the placebo arm across various interventions, and to examine PCE variability by outcome type and condition. DESIGN: We conducted a meta-epidemiological study. SETTING: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews with the keyword ‘placebo’ in titles, abstracts and keywords on 1 January 2020. PARTICIPANTS: We included reviews that showed statistically significant beneficial effects of the intervention over placebo for the first primary outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate PCEs based on the pooled result of each included review, grouped by outcome type and condition. The PCE quantifies how much of the observed treatment response can be achieved by the contextual effects. PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT STATEMENT: No patient or member of the public was involved in conducting this research. RESULTS: We included 328 out of 3175 Cochrane systematic reviews. The results of meta-analyses showed that PCEs varied greatly depending on outcome type (I(2)=98%) or condition (I(2)=98%), but mostly lie between 0.40 and 0.95. Overall, the PCEs were 0.65 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) on average. Subjective outcomes were 0.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.59), which was significantly smaller than those of semiobjective (PCE 0.78; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.85) or objective outcomes (PCE 0.94; 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that much of the observed benefit is not just due to the specific effect of the interventions. The specific effects of interventions may be larger for subjective outcomes than for objective or semiobjective outcomes. However, PCEs were exceptionally variable. When we evaluate the magnitude of PCEs, we should consider each PCE individually, for each condition, intervention and outcome in its context, to assess the importance of an intervention for each specific clinical setting. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-02 2022-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9887379/ /pubmed/35853683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111861 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Tsutsumi, Yusuke Tsujimoto, Yasushi Tajika, Aran Omae, Kenji Fujii, Tomoko Onishi, Akira Kataoka, Yuki Katsura, Morihiro Noma, Hisashi Sahker, Ethan Ostinelli, Edoardo Giuseppe Furukawa, Toshi A Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title | Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title_full | Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title_fullStr | Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title_short | Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews |
title_sort | proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on cochrane reviews |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887379/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35853683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111861 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tsutsumiyusuke proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT tsujimotoyasushi proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT tajikaaran proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT omaekenji proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT fujiitomoko proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT onishiakira proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT kataokayuki proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT katsuramorihiro proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT nomahisashi proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT sahkerethan proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT ostinelliedoardogiuseppe proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews AT furukawatoshia proportionattributabletocontextualeffectsingeneralmedicineametaepidemiologicalstudybasedoncochranereviews |