Suppr超能文献

知情同意过程中纳入授权欺骗并不影响实验性诱导疼痛的安慰剂效应的大小。

Inclusion of authorized deception in the informed consent process does not affect the magnitude of the placebo effect for experimentally induced pain.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Behavioral Sciences Building, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ont., Canada M3J 1P3.

出版信息

Pain. 2010 May;149(2):208-215. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.12.004. Epub 2010 Feb 20.

Abstract

The ethics of placebo research have been of paramount concern since the discovery of the phenomenon. To address these ethical concerns, Miller and colleagues (PLoS Med 2005 Sep;2(9):e262, 0853-0859) propose an alternate approach to placebo research, called "authorized deception", in which participants are alerted of the use of deception in the research prior to study enrollment and thus knowingly permit its use if they decide to participate. The present study sought to investigate the authorized deception methodology in experimentally induced placebo analgesia. The participants were randomly assigned to an authorized deception or non-authorized deception group. A commonly used protocol was employed wherein heat pain stimulation was surreptitiously lowered following the application of a placebo cream during a series of conditioning trials and the magnitude of the placebo effect was subsequently assessed in test trials for which the stimulus intensity was the same for both the placebo and control creams. Authorized deception did not have any negative impact on the magnitude of the placebo effect, recruitment and retention of participants, nor did it result in any significant psychological harm. The majority of participants who received this form of consent preferred it to the traditional approach in which the participants are not alerted to the presence of deception. These findings suggest that the use of authorized deception is a viable and ethically preferable alternative consent process for laboratory-based studies on placebo analgesia. Further studies are needed to examine the effect of authorized deception in clinical trials and other placebo research within a clinical setting.

摘要

自安慰剂现象被发现以来,其研究的伦理学问题一直备受关注。为了解决这些伦理问题,Miller 及其同事(PLoS Med 2005 Sep;2(9):e262, 0853-0859)提出了一种替代的安慰剂研究方法,称为“授权欺骗”,即在研究开始前告知参与者研究中使用了欺骗手段,从而让他们在决定参与研究时,如果知道会使用欺骗手段,就可以知情同意。本研究旨在调查实验性诱导安慰剂镇痛中的授权欺骗方法。参与者被随机分配到授权欺骗组或非授权欺骗组。采用了一种常用的方案,即在前一系列条件试验中,在应用安慰剂乳膏后秘密降低热痛刺激,随后在测试试验中评估安慰剂效应的程度,在测试试验中,安慰剂和对照乳膏的刺激强度相同。授权欺骗并没有对安慰剂效应的程度、参与者的招募和保留产生任何负面影响,也没有造成任何显著的心理伤害。大多数接受这种形式同意的参与者更喜欢这种形式,而不是不告知参与者存在欺骗的传统方法。这些发现表明,授权欺骗是一种可行的、伦理上更可取的替代同意程序,适用于实验室安慰剂镇痛研究。需要进一步的研究来检验授权欺骗在临床试验和其他临床环境中的安慰剂研究中的效果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验