Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31680841›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2019

Acupuncture for the Treatment of Pain - A Mega-Placebo?

Frauke Musial

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A systematic review of sham acupuncture validation studies.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Effective Oriental Magic for Analgesia: Acupuncture.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Review
  13. Cognitive components of acupuncture treatment.Integrative medicine research · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Frauke MusialDepartment of Community Medicine, National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, NAFKAM, Faculty of Health Science, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
UiT The Arctic University of Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several control conditions, such as penetrating sham acupuncture and non-penetrating placebo needles, have been used in clinical trials on acupuncture effects in chronic pain syndromes. All these control conditions are surprisingly effective with regard to their analgesic properties. These findings have fostered a discussion as to whether acupuncture is merely a placebo. Meta-analyses on the clinical effectiveness of placebo revealed that placebo interventions in general have minor, clinically important effects. Only in trials on pain and nausea, including acupuncture studies, did placebo effects vary from negligible to clinically important. At the same time, individual patient meta-analyses confirm that acupuncture is effective for the treatment of chronic pain, including small but statistically significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture. All acupuncture control conditions induce

Indexed as

acupunctureexpectationpainpain matrixplaceboplacebo needlessham acupuncture

Identifiers

PMID31680841
PMCPMC6811493
OpenAlexW2980465011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.