Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36718994›Full record

SynthesisPain2023

Placebo effects on cutaneous pain and itch: a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental results and methodology.

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

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pain, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. How the magnitude and precision of pain predictions shape pain experiences.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Joseph S BlytheHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0649-5721
Mia A ThomaidouHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2237-9459
Kaya J PeerdemanHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7622-1166
Antoinette I M van LaarhovenHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6932-9283
Myrthe M E van SchothorstHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Dieuwke S VeldhuijzenHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9046-1019
Andrea W M EversHealth, Medical and Neuropsychology Unit, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0090-5091

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractPlacebo effects, positive treatment outcomes that go beyond treatment processes, can alter sensations through learning mechanisms. Understanding how methodological factors contribute to the magnitude of placebo effects will help define the mechanisms by which these effects occur. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental placebo studies in cutaneous pain and itch in healthy samples, focused on how differences in methodology contribute to the resulting placebo effect magnitude. We conducted meta-analyses by learning mechanism and sensation, namely, for classical conditioning with verbal suggestion, verbal suggestion alone, and observational learning, separately for pain and itch. We conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression on the type of sensory stimuli, placebo treatment, number of acquisition and evocation trials, differences in calibrated intensities for placebo and control stimuli during acquisition, age, and sex. We replicated findings showing that a combination of classical conditioning with verbal suggestion induced larger placebo effects on pain ( k = 68, g = 0 . 59) than verbal suggestion alone ( k = 39, g = 0.38) and found a smaller effect for itch with verbal suggestion alone ( k = 7, g = 0.14). Using sham electrodes as placebo treatments corresponded with larger placebo effects on pain than when topical gels were used. Other methodological and demographic factors did not significantly affect placebo magnitudes. Placebo effects on pain and itch reliably occur in experimental settings with varied methods, and conditioning with verbal suggestion produced the strongest effects. Although methods may shape the placebo effect to some extent, these effects appear robust overall, and their underlying learning mechanisms may be harnessed for applications outside the laboratory.

Indexed as

PainPlacebo EffectConditioning, ClassicalHumansPruritusSuggestionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36718994
PMCPMC10184563

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.