ArticlePloS one2018
Placebo acceptability in chronic pain patients: More dependent on application mode and resulting condition than on individual factors.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Open-label placebos-a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- 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
- 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
- The Two Sides of Placebo Analgesia: Differential Functional Connectivity Reveals Mechanisms of Placebo Analgesic Response.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPlacebo effects can be very effective in certain pain conditions, but their use is still highly controversial. Several studies show that patients would accept a placebo treatment under certain circumstances, particularly when they are informed prior to the treatment or when there are no effective treatment alternatives. This study examines the question, which factors influence the degree of acceptability of a hypothetical placebo application.
methodsPatients filled in a questionnaire dealing with placebo applications. Moreover general data, diagnosis, duration of pain, pain ratings and anxiety/depression/stress scores, sleep disorders and opioid intake were collected from the patients` charts. 129 patients (44 men / 85 women, mean age 51.5 years, 18.0-80.9 years) entered the study. All patients had chronic pain syndromes and were treated in an universitary academic interdisciplinary pain center. Mean duration of pain was 14.7 years.
resultsThe study did not show significant differences in placebo acceptability among patients with different pain diagnoses or accompanying psychological diagnoses or disorders. Hidden placebo application was considered much more unacceptable for the patients than the enhanced placebo or the open placebo application. An improved condition was associated with less feeling of deception, more trust and less negative mood than an unchanged or worsened condition.
conclusionAcceptance of placebo as pain therapy is much more dependent on the way of application (hidden or open) or on the resulting condition (improved, unchanged or worsened) than on factors inherent in the individual patients.
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.