Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33320279›Full record

Trial reportActa dermato-venereologica2021

Nocebo Effects on Cowhage-evoked Itch: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Classical Conditioning and Observational Learning.

Joseph S Blythe, Kaya J Peerdeman, Dieuwke S Veldhuijzen, Myrthe M E van Schothorst, Mia A Thomaïdou, Antoinette I M van Laarhoven, Andrea W M Evers

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

7 authors.

Joseph S BlytheHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, NL-2333AK Leiden, The Netherlands. E-mail: j.s.blythe@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Kaya J Peerdeman
Dieuwke S Veldhuijzen
Myrthe M E van Schothorst
Mia A Thomaïdou
Antoinette I M van Laarhoven
Andrea W M Evers

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate learning processes underlying nocebo effects on itch, this study measured the efficacy of classical conditioning and observational learning for inducing nocebo effects on cowhage-evoked itch and scratching behaviour. A total of 58 healthy female participants were assigned to classical conditioning, observational learning, or sham conditioning groups. In the classical conditioning group, experimenters associated the application of an inert gel with increased itch intensity themselves. In the observational learning group, a video of the conditioning paradigm was shown. Nocebo effects were measured as the difference in itch or scratching between control and nocebo test phase trials, compared between learning and control groups. Compared with sham conditioning, classical conditioning induced a significant nocebo effect on itch, while observational learning did not. No nocebo effect on scratching was detected. These results highlight the role that learning through direct experiences plays in pruritic symptoms. Future research should investigate how a patient's history of unsuccessful treatments shapes treatment outcomes.

Indexed as

Conditioning, ClassicalNocebo EffectFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansPruritusSuggestionclassical conditioninglearningnocebo effectobservational learningprurituspsychodermatology

Identifiers

PMID33320279
PMCPMC9309821

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.