Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28636694›Full record

ArticleJAMA psychiatry2017

Placebo Response and Practice Effects in Schizophrenia Cognition Trials.

Richard S E Keefe, Vicki G Davis, Philip D Harvey, Alexandra S Atkins, George M Haig, Owen Hagino, Stephen Marder, Dana C Hilt, Daniel Umbricht

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Richard S E KeefeDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina2NeuroCog Trials, Durham, North Carolina.
Vicki G DavisNeuroCog Trials, Durham, North Carolina.
Philip D HarveyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
Alexandra S AtkinsNeuroCog Trials, Durham, North Carolina.
George M HaigNeuroscience Development, Abbvie, North Chicago, Illinois.
Owen HaginoResearch and Development, Immunology and Inflammation, Sanofi, Bridgewater, New Jersey.
Stephen MarderSemel Institute for Neuroscience at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Dana C HiltDrug Development, FORUM Pharmaceuticals, Waltham, Massachusetts.
Daniel UmbrichtNeuroscience, Ophthalmology, Rare Diseases, Roche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Patients' previous experience with performance-based cognitive tests in clinical trials for cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia can create practice-related improvements. Placebo-controlled trials for cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia are at risk for these practice effects, which can be difficult to distinguish from placebo effects. Objectives: To conduct a systematic evaluation of the magnitude of practice effects on the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) in cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia and to examine which demographic, clinical, and cognitive characteristics were associated with improvement in placebo conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: A blinded review was conducted of data from 813 patients with schizophrenia who were treated with placebo in 12 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials conducted mostly in outpatient clinics in North America, Europe, Asia, and Latin America from February 22, 2007, to March 1, 2014. A total of 779 patients provided data for the primary outcome measure at baseline and at least 1 follow-up. Seven trials had prebaseline assessments wherein the patients knew that they were not receiving treatment, allowing a comparison of practice and placebo effects in the same patients. Interventions: Placebo compared with various experimental drug treatments. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite score on the MCCB. Results: Of the 813 patients in the study (260 women and 553 men; mean [SD] age, 41.2 [11.5] years), the mean MCCB composite score at baseline was 22.8 points below the normative mean, and the mean (SEM) total change in the MCCB during receipt of placebo was 1.8 (0.2) T-score points (95% CI, 1.40-2.18), equivalent to a change of 0.18 SD. Practice effects in the 7 studies in which there was a prebaseline assessment were essentially identical to the postbaseline placebo changes. Baseline factors associated with greater improvements in the MCCB during receipt of placebo included more depression/anxiety (F1,438 = 5.41; P = .02), more motivation (F1,272 = 4.63; P = .03), and less improvement from screening to baseline (F1,421 = 59.32; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Placebo effects were minimal and associated with the number of postbaseline assessments and several patient characteristics. Given that the patients performed 2.28 SDs below normative standards on average at baseline, a mean placebo-associated improvement of less than 0.2 SD provides evidence that ceiling effects do not occur in these trials. These minimal changes in the MCCB could not be responsible for effective active treatments failing to separate from placebo.

Indexed as

Placebo EffectPractice, PsychologicalSchizophrenic PsychologyAdultCognition DisordersControlled Clinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsSchizophreniaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28636694
PMCPMC5710557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.