Evidence mapPaperPMID 38533458Full record

ArticlePain reports2024

Translating knowledge on placebo and nocebo effects into clinical practice.

Elif Buse Caliskan, Ulrike Bingel, Angelika Kunkel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Placebo and nocebo effect in pain.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. GutWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elif Buse CaliskanDepartment of Neurology, Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4640-8461
Ulrike BingelDepartment of Neurology, Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Angelika KunkelDepartment of Neurology, Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
University of Duisburg-Essen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Positive and negative treatment expectations are powerful modulators of health and treatment outcomes. A substantial part of treatment success is due to contextual factors modulating patient's expectations towards a treatment. Consequently, treatment expectations should be a target of therapeutic interventions themselves. Objectives: This article highlights the neurobiological underpinnings of treatment expectations as well as strategies to modulate contextual factors to optimize treatment outcomes in daily clinical settings. Methods: This clinical update aligns with the 2022 IASP Global Year Translating Pain Knowledge into Practice and selectively reviews the best available evidence and practice. Results: The effects of treatment expectations, also known as placebo and nocebo effects, are observed in various clinical conditions and physiological systems. However, most of our knowledge comes from the field of pain, where expectation effects substantially contribute to overall analgesic treatment outcomes. Experimental placebo analgesia paradigms provide the best illustration of how analgesic effects can be attributed not only to a pharmacological or specific treatment, but instead are the result of the expectation towards the treatment. The impact of expectations on treatment outcome is highly variable between individuals, and the identification of factors predicting an individual's response has proven to be challenging. Further research is required to provide personalized treatment strategies for the daily clinical practice. Conclusion: Patient's previous experiences and expectations are powerful modulators of treatment efficacy, tolerability, and adherence. By providing a comprehensive overview of recent advances in this field, this review offers valuable insights for clinicians and researchers seeking to improve patient-clinician interaction.

Indexed as

ExpectationNoceboNocebo hyperalgesiaPlaceboPlacebo analgesiaTreatment expectation

Identifiers

PMID38533458
PMCPMC10965200
OpenAlexW4393189044

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.