ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2026
Advancing the Prediction and Understanding of Placebo Responses in Chronic Back Pain Using Large Language Models.
Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comprehensive survey of AI agents in healthcare.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Review
- Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Low Back Pain: a Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Advancing the Prediction and Understanding of Placebo Responses in Chronic Back Pain Using Large Language Models.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlacebo analgesia is a widely studied clinical phenomenon, yet placebo responses vary widely across individuals. Prior research has identified biopsychosocial factors that determine the likelihood of an individual to respond to placebo, yet generalizability and ecological validity in those studies have been limited due to the inability to account for dynamic personal and treatment effects.
methodsWe assessed fine-tuned large language models (LLMs) for the prediction of placebo responses in chronic low-back pain using contextual features extracted from patient interviews, as they speak about their lifestyle, pain, and treatment history. Interviews were conducted as part of two RCTs designed to study the placebo effect. These interviews were collected after treatment in the first trial (discovery cohort) and prior to treatment in the second trial (validation cohort).
resultsSemantic features extracted with LLMs can predict which individuals respond to a placebo, with an accuracy of 74% in unseen data, and validating with 70% accuracy in an independent cohort. Furthermore, in contrast to previous work, LLMs eliminated the need for pre-selecting search terms, enabling a fully data-driven approach, and provided interpretable insights into psychosocial factors underlying placebo responses.
conclusionsThese findings expand on prior research by integrating state-of-art NLP techniques to address limitations in interpretability and context sensitivity of the traditional methods in related work. This method highlights the role of language models to link language and psychological states, paving the way for a deeper quantitative exploration of biopsychosocial phenomena, and to understand how they relate to treatment outcomes. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This study paves the way for a deeper yet quantitative exploration of biopsychosocial phenomena through language, and to understand how they relate to treatment outcomes, namely placebo. In this case it highlights nuanced linguistic patterns linked to responder status, which tap into semantic dimensions such as "anxiety," "resignation," and "hope".
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.