ArticlePloS one2014
When and why placebo-prescribing is acceptable and unacceptable: a focus group study of patients' views.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidencing general acceptability of open-label placebo use for tackling overtreatment in primary care: a mixed methods study.BMC medicine · 2023Trial
- Task-dependent functional connectivity of pain is associated with the magnitude of placebo analgesia in pain-free individuals.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Review
- Acceptance of Open-Label Placebos Is Linked to Holistic Health Beliefs and Thinking Styles.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Do patients with fibromyalgia syndrome and healthy people differ in their opinions on placebo effects in routine medical care?Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Article
- Experiences of Patients Taking Conditioned Open-Label Placebos for Reduction of Postoperative Pain and Opioid Exposure After Spine Surgery.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- Treating Pain With Open-Label Placebos: A Qualitative Study With Post-Surgical Pain Patients.The journal of pain · 2021Article
- Article
- Harnessing Placebo Effects in Primary Care: Using the Person-Based Approach to Develop an Online Intervention to Enhance Practitioners' Communication of Clinical Empathy and Realistic Optimism During Consultations.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Primary care providers' use of and attitudes towards placebos: An exploratory focus group study with US physicians.British journal of health psychology · 2020Article
- [Appearances are not deceptive: clinical evidence and new research approaches to open-label placebo].Der Nervenarzt · 2020Review
- Article
- The Knowledge of Contextual Factors as Triggers of Placebo and Nocebo Effects in Patients With Musculoskeletal Pain: Findings From a National Survey.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Optimizing ExpectationsFrontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Lay People's Ethical Attitudes To Placebo Treatment: A Q-Methodology Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Open label placebo: can honestly prescribed placebos evoke meaningful therapeutic benefits?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Article
- What techniques might be used to harness placebo effects in non-malignant pain? A literature review and survey to develop a taxonomy.BMJ open · 2017Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurveys of doctors suggest that they use placebos and placebo effects clinically to help patients. However, patients' views are not well-understood. We aimed to identify when and why placebo-prescribing in primary care might be acceptable and unacceptable to patients.
methodsA purposive diverse sample of 58 English-speaking adults (18 men; aged 19-80 years) participated in 11 focus groups. Vignettes describing doctors prescribing placebos in primary care were used to initiate discussions. Data were analyzed inductively.
resultsParticipants discussed diverse harms and benefits of placebo-prescribing for individual patients, carers, healthcare providers, and society. Two perspectives on placebo-prescribing were identified. First, the "consequentialist" perspective focused on the potential for beneficial outcomes of placebo-prescribing. Here, some participants thought placebos are beneficial and should be used clinically; they often invoked the power of the mind or mind-body interactions. Others saw placebos as ineffective and therefore a waste of time and money. Second, the "respecting autonomy" perspective emphasized the harms caused by the deceptive processes thought necessary for placebo-prescribing. Here, participants judged placebo-prescribing unacceptable because placebo-prescribers deceive patients, thus a doctor who prescribes placebos cannot be trusted and patients' autonomy is compromised. They also saw placebo-responders as gullible, which deterred them from trying placebos themselves. Overall, the word "placebo" was often thought to imply "ineffective"; some participants suggested alternative carefully chosen language that could enable doctors to prescribe placebos without directly lying to patients.
conclusionsNegative views of placebos derive from beliefs that placebos do not work and/or that they require deception by the doctor. Positive views are pragmatic in that if placebos work then any associated processes (e.g. mechanisms, deception) are deemed unimportant. Public education about placebos and their effects is warranted and research to identify optimal ways of harnessing placebo effects in clinical practice is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.