Evidence mapPaperPMID 35412513Full record

Trial reportPsychosomatic medicine

Psychological Predictors of Response to Open-Label Versus Double-Blind Placebo in a Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.

Sarah Ballou, Julia W Haas, Johanna Iturrino, Judy Nee, Irving Kirsch, Vikram Rangan, Vivian Cheng, Anthony Lembo, Ted J Kaptchuk, John M Kelley

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychosomatic medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Neural underpinnings of open-label placebo effects in emotional distress.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2023
    Article
  9. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah BallouFrom the Division of Gastroenterology (Ballou, Haas, Iturrino, Nee, Rangan, Cheng, Lembo) and Program in Placebo Studies (Kirsch, Kaptchuk, Kelley), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston; and Department of Psychology (Kelley), Endicott College, Beverly, Massachusetts.
Julia W Haas
Johanna Iturrino
Judy Nee
Irving Kirsch
Vikram Rangan
Vivian Cheng
Anthony Lembo
Ted J Kaptchuk
John M Kelley
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · US

Funding

NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT008573
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThere is growing evidence that open-label placebo (OLP) may be an efficacious treatment of chronic and functional conditions. However, patient-level predictors of response to OLP have not been clearly identified. The aim of this study is to evaluate the psychological predictors of response to OLP and to compare this to double-blind placebo (DBP) and no-pill control (NPC).

methodsThis study is a secondary analysis of data collected in a 6-week randomized controlled trial evaluating placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The primary outcome was change in IBS severity. Hierarchical linear regression identified predictors of placebo response in general and compared them between those randomized to OLP, DBP, and NPC. Predictor variables included personality traits, generalized anxiety, depression, visceral sensitivity (a measure of symptom-specific anxiety), and pain catastrophizing.

resultsA total of 210 participants (mean age = 42.3 years, 73.3% female) were included. Regression models revealed that visceral sensitivity was a predictor of response to OLP and NPC but not DBP. Interestingly, the effects were opposite, with high visceral sensitivity predicting less improvement in NPC and more improvement in OLP. Pain catastrophizing was a negative predictor of response to OLP (i.e., high pain catastrophizing was associated with less improvement in OLP). Neither visceral sensitivity nor pain catastrophizing played a significant role for response to DBP.

conclusionsIBS participants who score low on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale but high on the Visceral Sensitivity Index seem to benefit particularly from OLP. Our study suggests that different psychological mechanisms may be involved in DBP and OLP interventions.

Indexed as

Irritable Bowel SyndromeAdultAnxietyCatastrophizationDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35412513
PMCPMC9271597
OpenAlexW4223421950

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 Socratic graph.