Suppr超能文献

安慰剂对照:历史、方法学和一般方面。

Placebo controls: historical, methodological and general aspects.

机构信息

Institute of Transcultural Health Sciences and Samueli Institute, European Office, European University Viadrina, PO Box 1786, 15203 Frankfurt (Oder), Germany.

出版信息

Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Jun 27;366(1572):1870-8. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0401.

Abstract

Control conditions were introduced through the trial of Mesmerism in Paris. Placebo controls became codified standard in 1946. Although seemingly unchallenged, there are various problems with this received view. The notion of a placebo is only defined from the negative. A positive notion proposed that placebo effects are effects owing to the meaning an intervention has for an individual. Thus, placebo effects are individualized, whereas standard research paradigms reveal only grossly averaged behaviour. Also, placebo effects are context sensitive, dependent on psychological factors such as expectancy, relief of stress and anxiety, and hence can generate strong and long-lasting treatment effects. These, however, are not predictable. Such a situation can lead to the efficacy paradox: sometimes, sham interventions can be more powerful than proved, evidence-based treatments. This situation has methodological consequences. Placebo-controlled randomized trials reveal only part of the answer, whether an intervention is effective. This is valuable information for regulators, but not necessarily also for patients and of limited value for providers. Hence, I have argued that we need to complement the hierarchical model of evidence by a circular one, in which various methods are employed on equal footing to answer different questions.

摘要

控制条件是通过巴黎梅斯梅尔主义试验引入的。安慰剂对照在 1946 年成为规范标准。尽管这一观点似乎没有受到挑战,但它存在各种问题。安慰剂的概念仅仅是从负面定义的。一个积极的概念是,安慰剂效应是由于干预对个体的意义而产生的效应。因此,安慰剂效应是个体化的,而标准的研究范式仅揭示了大致平均的行为。此外,安慰剂效应是情境敏感的,取决于心理因素,如期望、缓解压力和焦虑,因此可以产生强烈和持久的治疗效果。然而,这些是不可预测的。这种情况可能导致疗效悖论:有时,假干预可能比经过证实的、基于证据的治疗更有效。这种情况具有方法学上的后果。安慰剂对照的随机试验仅揭示了干预是否有效的部分答案。这对监管机构来说是有价值的信息,但对患者来说不一定,对提供者来说价值有限。因此,我认为我们需要用一个循环模型来补充证据的层次模型,在这个模型中,各种方法平等地用于回答不同的问题。

相似文献

1
Placebo controls: historical, methodological and general aspects.安慰剂对照:历史、方法学和一般方面。
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Jun 27;366(1572):1870-8. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0401.
3
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
5
Placebo, a historical perspective.安慰剂,历史的视角。
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2012 Nov;22(11):770-4. doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2012.04.003. Epub 2012 May 18.
8
[Placebo and placebo effects--a review].[安慰剂与安慰剂效应——综述]
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2002 Aug;52(8):332-42. doi: 10.1055/s-2002-33077.
10
Placebo effects: clinical aspects and neurobiology.安慰剂效应:临床方面与神经生物学
Brain. 2008 Nov;131(Pt 11):2812-23. doi: 10.1093/brain/awn116. Epub 2008 Jun 21.

引用本文的文献

10
Introduction to placebo effects in medicine: mechanisms and clinical implications.医学中安慰剂效应介绍:机制与临床意义。
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Jun 27;366(1572):1783-9. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0414.

本文引用的文献

5
Acupuncture and knee osteoarthritis: a three-armed randomized trial.针灸与膝骨关节炎:一项三臂随机试验
Ann Intern Med. 2006 Jul 4;145(1):12-20. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-1-200607040-00005.
8
HOW TO evaluate a new drug.如何评估一种新药。
Am J Med. 1954 Nov;17(5):722-7. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(54)90031-5.
9
Deconstructing the placebo effect and finding the meaning response.解构安慰剂效应并找到意义反应。
Ann Intern Med. 2002 Mar 19;136(6):471-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-136-6-200203190-00011.
10
[The effectiveness paradox in complementary medicine].[补充医学中的有效性悖论]
Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd. 2001 Aug;8(4):193-5. doi: 10.1159/000057221.

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