Cargando…

Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples

The use of open-label placebos (OLPs) has shown to be effective in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether OLPs are effective in experimental studies with non-clinical populations. We searched five databases on April 15, 2021. We conducted separate anal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spille, Lukas, Fendel, Johannes C., Seuling, Patrik D., Göritz, Anja S., Schmidt, Stefan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36871028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30362-z
_version_ 1784900992409534464
author Spille, Lukas
Fendel, Johannes C.
Seuling, Patrik D.
Göritz, Anja S.
Schmidt, Stefan
author_facet Spille, Lukas
Fendel, Johannes C.
Seuling, Patrik D.
Göritz, Anja S.
Schmidt, Stefan
author_sort Spille, Lukas
collection PubMed
description The use of open-label placebos (OLPs) has shown to be effective in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether OLPs are effective in experimental studies with non-clinical populations. We searched five databases on April 15, 2021. We conducted separate analyses for self-reported and objective outcomes and examined whether the level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs. Of the 3573 identified records, 20 studies comprising 1201 participants were included, of which 17 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The studies investigated the effect of OLPs on well-being, pain, stress, arousal, wound healing, sadness, itchiness, test anxiety, and physiological recovery. We found a significant effect of OLPs for self-reported outcomes (k = 13; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.28, 0.58; I(2) = 7.2%), but not for objective outcomes (k = 8; SMD =  − 0.02; 95% CI =  − 0.25, 0.21; I(2) = 43.6%). The level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs for objective outcomes (p = 0.02), but not for self-reported outcomes. The risk of bias was moderate for most studies, and the overall quality of the evidence was rated low to very low. In conclusion, OLPs appear to be effective when examined in experimental studies. However, further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying OLPs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9985604
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99856042023-03-06 Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples Spille, Lukas Fendel, Johannes C. Seuling, Patrik D. Göritz, Anja S. Schmidt, Stefan Sci Rep Article The use of open-label placebos (OLPs) has shown to be effective in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether OLPs are effective in experimental studies with non-clinical populations. We searched five databases on April 15, 2021. We conducted separate analyses for self-reported and objective outcomes and examined whether the level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs. Of the 3573 identified records, 20 studies comprising 1201 participants were included, of which 17 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The studies investigated the effect of OLPs on well-being, pain, stress, arousal, wound healing, sadness, itchiness, test anxiety, and physiological recovery. We found a significant effect of OLPs for self-reported outcomes (k = 13; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.28, 0.58; I(2) = 7.2%), but not for objective outcomes (k = 8; SMD =  − 0.02; 95% CI =  − 0.25, 0.21; I(2) = 43.6%). The level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs for objective outcomes (p = 0.02), but not for self-reported outcomes. The risk of bias was moderate for most studies, and the overall quality of the evidence was rated low to very low. In conclusion, OLPs appear to be effective when examined in experimental studies. However, further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying OLPs. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9985604/ /pubmed/36871028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30362-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Spille, Lukas
Fendel, Johannes C.
Seuling, Patrik D.
Göritz, Anja S.
Schmidt, Stefan
Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title_full Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title_fullStr Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title_full_unstemmed Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title_short Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
title_sort open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36871028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30362-z
work_keys_str_mv AT spillelukas openlabelplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofexperimentalstudieswithnonclinicalsamples
AT fendeljohannesc openlabelplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofexperimentalstudieswithnonclinicalsamples
AT seulingpatrikd openlabelplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofexperimentalstudieswithnonclinicalsamples
AT goritzanjas openlabelplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofexperimentalstudieswithnonclinicalsamples
AT schmidtstefan openlabelplacebosasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofexperimentalstudieswithnonclinicalsamples