ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
A novel provocation protocol to identify nocebo effects in clinical practice-a proof-of-concept n-of-1 study.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nocebo effects, driven by negative expectations rather than pharmacological mechanisms, are an under-recognized cause of adverse effects in clinical practice. Although experimental studies have used expectation manipulation to explore these phenomena, translation into clinical diagnostic approaches remains limited. We report the first clinical application of a novel provocation protocol in a single patient as an n-of-1 trial to illustrate its potential to identify whether reported adverse events in this patient were driven by nocebo mechanisms. Methods: We developed an extension of the crossover balanced placebo design incorporating additional manipulation of patient expectations comprising five structured provocation sessions using an active substance or placebo combined with correct, and intentionally misleading declarations under open-label and blinded conditions. As a proof-of-concept this protocol was applied to a single patient with self-reported alcohol intolerance using ethanol and water. Symptom severity for each provocation was assessed using a numeric rating scale and analyzed descriptively. Results: The most severe symptoms followed the administration of open-label ethanol (mean numeric rating scale [NRS] 5.3; maximum 8) and water deceptively labeled as ethanol (mean NRS 4.1; maximum 7), while blinded ethanol (mean NRS 2.8; maximum 5) and blinded water (mean NRS 2.6, maximum 5) produced only mild reactions. These findings are consistent with adverse reactions in this single patient primarily driven by expectations, indicating a nocebo mechanism. Conclusion: This report demonstrates the proof-of-concept value of a novel "mixed open blinded crossover balanced placebo provocation protocol" and illustrates the potential to identify nocebo effects in clinical practice. Whether this exploratory finding have broader relevance warrants investigation in larger cohorts.
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.