ArticleClujul medical (1957)2017
The effects of distraction on symptoms during drug provocation test.
Article in Clujul medical (1957), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influencing Side-Effects to Medicinal Treatments: A Systematic Review of Brief Psychological Interventions.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome patients may have psychosomatic complaints due to their previous experiences during the drug hypersensitivity reaction. Worry about being hurt due to an administered drug is termed nocebo effect, which is the opposite of the placebo effect. In our study, we investigated the effect of distraction on symptoms during drug provocation test.
methodsOur study included 112 patients who underwent DPTs for alternative purposes in our clinic. Previous hypersensitivity reactions of all the patients had objective signs. Patients were divided into two groups for the DPT. Sixty-three patients were kept busy during the test, performing tasks such as filling questionnaires, arranging files in alphabetical and numerical order, and doing archiving (Group 1). Forty-nine patients did not perform any tasks during the test (Group 2). Reactions that occurred during the test were recorded.
resultsDuring the DPT, 5 patients in Group 1 (5/63, 7.9%) and 17 patients in Group 2 (17/49, 34.7%), i.e. a total of 22 patients (22/112, 19.6%), had a reaction. There was a statistically significant difference between Group 1 and Group 2 according to the frequency of the reaction development.
conclusionsPatient psychosomatic complaints during DPTs are proportional to their association with previous allergic reactions. In order to prevent such reactions, it may be beneficial to keep the patients busy with an activity in order to distract them during the test.
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.