Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35895060›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2022

Use of Placebo and Nonoperative Control Groups in Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Teemu Karjalainen, Juuso Heikkinen, Ljoudmila Busija, Jarkko Jokihaara, Adriane M Lewin, Justine M Naylor, Laura Harris, Ian A Harris, Rachelle Buchbinder, Sam Adie

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06585033 (Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Therapy-Resistant Neuropathic Pain After Lumbar Spinal Surgery - A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Cross-over Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

NCT06585033 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Therapy-Resistant Neuropathic Pain After Lumbar Spinal Surgery - A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Cross-over Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorSahlgrenska University HospitalRan2024 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsChronic Postoperative PainArmsSpinal cord stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Teemu KarjalainenDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Nova Central Finland, Jyvaskyla, Finland.
Juuso HeikkinenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Ljoudmila BusijaBiostatistical Consulting Platform, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Jarkko JokihaaraTampere University and Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Adriane M LewinIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.
Justine M NaylorSouth Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW, Liverpool Hospital, New South Wales, Australia.
Laura HarrisSydney Orthopaedic Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Ian A HarrisIngham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachelle BuchbinderDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University.
Sam AdieSt George and Sutherland Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Monash University · AUUNSW Sydney · AUCabrini Hospital · AUIngham Institute · AULiverpool Hospital · AUOulu University Hospital · FITampere University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Nonspecific effects, particularly placebo effects, are thought to contribute significantly to the observed effect in surgical trials. Objective: To estimate the proportion of the observed effect of surgical treatment that is due to nonspecific effects (including the placebo effect). Data Sources: Published Cochrane reviews and updated, extended search of MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL until March 2019. Study Selection: Published randomized placebo-controlled surgical trials and trials comparing the effect of the same surgical interventions with nonoperative controls (ie, no treatment, usual care, or exercise program). Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pairs of authors independently screened the search results, assessed full texts to identify eligible studies and the risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. The proportion of all nonspecific effects was calculated as the change in the placebo control divided by the change in the active surgery and pooled in a random-effect meta-analysis. To estimate the magnitude of the placebo effect, we pooled the difference in outcome between placebo and nonoperative controls and used metaregression to estimate the association between the type of control group and the treatment effect (difference between the groups), adjusting for risk of bias, sample size, and type of outcome. Main Outcomes and Measures: Between- and within-group effect sizes expressed as Hedges g. Results: In this review, 100 trials were included comprising data from 62 trials with placebo controls (3 also included nonoperative controls), and 38 trials with nonoperative controls (32 interventions; 10 699 participants). Risk of bias across trials was comparable except for performance and detection bias, which was high in trials with nonoperative controls. The mean nonspecific effects accounted for 67% (95% CI, 61% to 73%) of the observed change after surgery; however, this varied widely between different procedures. The estimated surgical placebo effect had a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.13 (95% CI, -0.26 to 0.51). Trials with placebo and nonoperative controls found comparable treatment effects (SMD, -0.09 [95% CI, -0.35 to 0.18]; 15 interventions; 73 between-group effects; adjusted analysis: SMD, -0.11 [95% CI, -0.37 to 0.15]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this review, the change in health state after surgery was composed largely of nonspecific effects, but no evidence supported a large placebo effect. Placebo-controlled surgical trials may be redundant when trials with nonoperative controls consistently report no substantial association from surgery compared with nonoperative treatment.

Indexed as

ExercisePlacebo EffectControl GroupsHumans

Identifiers

PMID35895060
PMCPMC9331086
OpenAlexW4288051231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.