Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28321318›Full record

ArticleJRSM open2017

Does the model of additive effect in placebo research still hold true? A narrative review.

Katja Boehm, Bettina Berger, Ulrich Weger, Peter Heusser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JRSM open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. The Placebo Effect in Psychosis: Why It Matters and How to Measure It.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2023
    Review
  5. Harnessing placebo: Lessons from psychedelic science.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Revisiting the Randomized Controlled Trial.Pakistan journal of medical sciences
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katja BoehmFaculty of Health, Institute for Integrative Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, 58448 Witten, Germany; Faculty of Health, Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, 58448 Witten, Germany.
Bettina BergerFaculty of Health, Institute for Integrative Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, 58448 Witten, Germany.
Ulrich WegerFaculty of Health, Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, 58448 Witten, Germany.
Peter HeusserFaculty of Health, Institute for Integrative Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, 58448 Witten, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Personalised and contextualised care has been turned into a major demand by people involved in healthcare suggesting to move toward person-centred medicine. The assessment of person-centred medicine can be most effectively achieved if treatments are investigated using 'with versus without' person-centredness or integrative study designs. However, this assumes that the components of an integrative or person-centred intervention have an additive relationship to produce the total effect. Beecher's model of additivity assumes an additive relation between placebo and drug effects and is thus presenting an arithmetic summation. So far, no review has been carried out assessing the validity of the additive model, which is to be questioned and more closely investigated in this review. Initial searches for primary studies were undertaken in July 2016 using Pubmed and Google Scholar. In order to find matching publications of similar magnitude for the comparison part of this review, corresponding matches for all included reviews were sought. A total of 22 reviews and 3 clinical and experimental studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The results pointed to the following factors actively questioning the additive model: interactions of various effects, trial design, conditioning, context effects and factors, neurobiological factors, mechanism of action, statistical factors, intervention-specific factors (alcohol, caffeine), side-effects and type of intervention. All but one of the closely assessed publications was questioning the additive model. A closer examination of study design is necessary. An attempt in a more systematic approach geared towards solutions could be a suggestion for future research in this field.

Indexed as

additive effectperson-centred medicinePlaceboreview

Identifiers

PMID28321318
PMCPMC5347270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.