Trial reportJAMA network open2021
Effect of Briefing on Acupuncture Treatment Outcome Expectations, Pain, and Adverse Side Effects Among Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nocebo effects in long-term health conditions: a systematic review of experimental studies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Understanding Placebo and Nocebo Responses Based on a Randomized Sham-Controlled Study on Acupuncture in Integrative Cancer Care.Integrative cancer therapiesTrial
- Temporal summation does not predict the acupuncture response in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- The relevance of outcome expectations in group hypnosis for stress reduction: a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Placebo and nocebo effects of percutaneous needle electrolysis and dry-needling: an intra and inter-treatment sessions analysis of a three-arm randomized double-blinded controlled trial in patients with patellar tendinopathy.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Measures of sleep disturbance are not routinely captured in trials for chronic low back pain: a systematic scoping review of 282 trials.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2023Article
- Unraveling Negative Expectations and Nocebo-Related Effects in Musculoskeletal Pain.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: In observational studies, patients' treatment outcome expectations have been associated with better outcomes (ie, a placebo response), whereas concerns about adverse side effects have been associated with an in increase in the negative effects of treatments (ie, a nocebo response). Some randomized trials have suggested that communication from clinicians could affect the treatment outcomes by changing patients' expectations. Objective: To investigate whether treatment outcome expectations and reported adverse side effects could be affected by different briefing contents before a minimal acupuncture treatment in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized single-blinded clinical trial was conducted among patients with CLBP at 1 outpatient clinic in Switzerland who had a pain intensity of at least 4 on a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10. Different recruitment channels were used to enroll patients. Data were collected from May 2016 to December 2017 and were analyzed from June to November 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either a regular expectation briefing or a high expectation briefing (effectiveness) and either a regular adverse side effect briefing or an intense adverse side effect briefing (adverse side effect) in a 2 × 2 factorial design. The intervention (briefing sessions and written materials) was standardized and delivered before the acupuncture treatment, with additional booster informative emails provided during the 4-week, 8-session acupuncture course. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the patients' expectations regarding the effectiveness of the acupuncture treatment (Expectation for Treatment Scale [ETS]) after the briefing and the subsequent pain intensity (numeric rating scale). The primary end point for the adverse side effect briefing was the adverse side effect score at the end of the acupuncture treatment, derived from session-by-session assessments of adverse side effects. Results: A total of 152 patients with CLBP (mean [SD] age, 39.54 [12.52] years; 100 [65.8%] women) were included. The estimated group difference (regular vs high) for the ETS was -0.16 (95% CI -0.81 to 0.50, P = .64), indicating no evidence for a difference between intervention groups. There was also no evidence for a difference in pain intensity at the end of the acupuncture treatment between the groups with different expectation briefings. The adverse side effects score in the group with the intense adverse side effect briefing were estimated to be 1.31 times higher (95% CI, 0.94 to 1.82; P = .11) than after a regular adverse side effect briefing, but the finding was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, suggestions regarding treatment benefits (placebo) and adverse side effects (nocebo) did not affect treatment expectations or adverse side effects. Information regarding adverse side effects might require more research to understand nocebo responses. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register Identifier: DRKS00010191.
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.