School of Psychology, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Clin Trials. 2010 Jun;7(3):246-55. doi: 10.1177/1740774510367916. Epub 2010 Apr 26.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that use placebo controls to achieve double-blinding intend to establish the efficacy of a treatment over and above expectancy and other forms of bias. Despite this, a growing body of research suggests that participant expectancies can influence the outcomes of these trials.
and
This nonsystematic review examines research assessing the role of participant expectancies in double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs in order to determine if and how they can limit these types of trials.
There appear to be at least three ways in which participant expectancies can limit the validity of double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs. First, when blinding fails researches cannot determine whether any observed improvement in the group receiving active treatment resulted because of the treatment's effect or because of participants' expectancies. Second, participant expectancies could create ceiling effects if there are strong placebo effects in each treatment arm and this may falsely suggest that the active treatment is ineffective without expectancy. Third, the knowledge that a participant will be allocated active treatment or placebo in double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs is likely to lead to weaker treatment responses than would be expected in standard clinical practice, in which patients are unlikely to doubt that they have been given an active treatment.
Participants' expectancies can undermine the validity of double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs. Researchers conducting these trials should assess participants' beliefs about their treatment allocation and actively investigate if and how these beliefs may have influenced the trial's outcome. Clinical Trials 2010; 7: 246-255. http://ctj.sagepub.com.
使用安慰剂对照实现双盲的随机对照试验(RCTs)旨在确定一种治疗方法相对于预期和其他形式的偏倚的疗效。尽管如此,越来越多的研究表明,参与者的期望可以影响这些试验的结果。
和
本非系统性综述研究了评估参与者期望在双盲安慰剂对照 RCTs 中作用的研究,以确定它们是否以及如何限制这些类型的试验。
似乎有至少三种方式,参与者的期望可以限制双盲安慰剂对照 RCTs 的有效性。首先,当盲法失败时,研究人员无法确定在接受活性治疗的组中观察到的任何改善是由于治疗的效果还是由于参与者的期望。其次,如果每个治疗臂都有强烈的安慰剂效应,参与者的期望可能会产生天花板效应,这可能会错误地表明在没有期望的情况下,活性治疗无效。第三,在双盲安慰剂对照 RCTs 中知道参与者将被分配活性治疗或安慰剂,可能会导致比标准临床实践中预期的治疗反应更弱,在标准临床实践中,患者不太可能怀疑他们已被给予活性治疗。
参与者的期望可能会破坏双盲安慰剂对照 RCTs 的有效性。进行这些试验的研究人员应评估参与者对其治疗分配的信念,并积极调查这些信念是否以及如何影响试验的结果。临床试验 2010; 7: 246-255。http://ctj.sagepub.com。