ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Optimized communication during risk disclosure to reduce nocebo headache after lumbar puncture-a study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Research on the digital transaction model of the sports industry chain based on blockchain technology.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk communication has been found to be a driver of nocebo effects in medical settings by enhancing negative expectations. In fact, merely disclosing the risk of side effects and complications of treatments or medical procedures increases reports of adverse events. Along these lines, it has been proposed that the occurrence of headache after lumbar puncture (LP), a routine diagnostic procedure in neurology, is caused to a large degree by the information delivered by the physician during the informed consent procedure. As withholding information conflicts with principles of patient autonomy, strategies are needed to mitigate nocebo-associated headaches without omitting the disclosure of risks. Here, we present a detailed study protocol for a preregistered, prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial with N = 80 inpatients at the neurology department of the University Hospital Essen who have an indication for a diagnostic LP. The trial is designed to test whether optimized communication strategies aimed at minimizing nocebo effects during the informed consent procedure reduce headache-related impairment after LP compared to standard-of-care. Secondary outcomes include expectation of side effects, state anxiety, headache intensity and duration, use of on-demand pain medication, perceived warmth and competence of the physician, and satisfaction with the procedure.
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.