• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

药物干预的活性安慰剂对照组很少使用,但值得认真考虑:方法学概述。

Active placebo control groups of pharmacological interventions were rarely used but merited serious consideration: a methodological overview.

作者信息

Jensen Jakob Solgaard, Bielefeldt Andreas Ørsted, Hróbjartsson Asbjørn

机构信息

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet Department 7811, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet Department 7811, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jul;87:35-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 22.

DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.001
PMID:28342907
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Active placebos are control interventions that mimic the side effects of the experimental interventions in randomized trials and are sometimes used to reduce the risk of unblinding. We wanted to assess how often randomized clinical drug trials use active placebo control groups; to provide a catalog, and a characterization, of such trials; and to analyze methodological arguments for and against the use of active placebo.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

An overview consisting of three thematically linked substudies. In an observational substudy, we assessed the prevalence of active placebo groups based on a random sample of 200 PubMed indexed placebo-controlled randomized drug trials published in October 2013. In a systematic review, we identified and characterized trials with active placebo control groups irrespective of publication time. In a third substudy, we reviewed publications with substantial methodological comments on active placebo groups (searches in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and HighWirePress).

RESULTS

The prevalence of trials with active placebo groups published in 2013 was 1 out of 200 (95% confidence interval: 0-2), 0.5% (0-1%). We identified and characterized 89 randomized trials (published 1961-2014) using active placebos, for example, antihistamines, anticholinergic drugs, and sedatives. Such trials typically involved a crossover design, the experimental intervention had noticeable side effects, and the outcomes were patient-reported. The use of active placebos was clustered in specific research settings and did not appear to reflect consistently the side effect profile of the experimental intervention, for example, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were compared with active placebos in pain trials but not in depression trials. We identified and analyzed 25 methods publications with substantial comments. The main argument for active placebo was to reduce risk of unblinding; the main argument against was the risk of unintended therapeutic effect.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological active placebo control interventions are rarely used in randomized clinical trials, but they constitute a methodological tool which merits serious consideration. We suggest that active placebos are used more often in trials of drugs with noticeable side effects, especially in situations where the expected therapeutic effects are modest and the risk of bias due to unblinding is high.

摘要

目的

活性安慰剂是在随机试验中模拟试验性干预措施副作用的对照干预措施,有时用于降低破盲风险。我们希望评估随机临床药物试验使用活性安慰剂对照组的频率;提供此类试验的目录和特征描述;并分析支持和反对使用活性安慰剂的方法学论据。

研究设计与设置

一项由三个主题相关的子研究组成的综述。在一项观察性子研究中,我们基于2013年10月发表的200篇被PubMed收录的安慰剂对照随机药物试验的随机样本,评估活性安慰剂组的患病率。在一项系统评价中,我们识别并描述了使用活性安慰剂对照组的试验,不考虑发表时间。在第三个子研究中,我们回顾了对活性安慰剂组有大量方法学评论的出版物(在PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、谷歌学术和HighWirePress中检索)。

结果

2013年发表的使用活性安慰剂组的试验患病率为200分之一(95%置信区间:0 - 2),即0.5%(0 - 1%)。我们识别并描述了89项使用活性安慰剂的随机试验(发表于1961 - 2014年),例如抗组胺药、抗胆碱能药物和镇静剂。此类试验通常采用交叉设计,试验性干预措施有明显副作用,且结果由患者报告。活性安慰剂的使用集中在特定研究环境中,似乎并未始终反映试验性干预措施的副作用特征,例如,在疼痛试验中选择性5 - 羟色胺再摄取抑制剂与活性安慰剂进行了比较,但在抑郁症试验中未进行比较。我们识别并分析了25篇有大量评论的方法学出版物。支持活性安慰剂的主要论据是降低破盲风险;反对的主要论据是意外治疗效果的风险。

结论

药理活性安慰剂对照干预措施在随机临床试验中很少使用,但它们构成了一种值得认真考虑的方法学工具。我们建议,在有明显副作用的药物试验中,尤其是在预期治疗效果适度且因破盲导致偏倚风险较高的情况下,应更频繁地使用活性安慰剂。

相似文献

1
Active placebo control groups of pharmacological interventions were rarely used but merited serious consideration: a methodological overview.药物干预的活性安慰剂对照组很少使用,但值得认真考虑:方法学概述。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jul;87:35-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 22.
2
Control interventions in randomised trials among people with mental health disorders.精神障碍患者随机试验中的对照干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Apr 4;4(4):MR000050. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000050.pub2.
3
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
4
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
5
Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C.用于慢性丙型肝炎的直接作用抗病毒药物。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 18;9(9):CD012143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012143.pub3.
6
Pharmacological treatment for antipsychotic-related constipation.抗精神病药物相关性便秘的药物治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 24;1(1):CD011128. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011128.pub2.
7
Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.抗抑郁药治疗成人慢性疼痛的疼痛管理:一项网络荟萃分析。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(62):1-155. doi: 10.3310/MKRT2948.
8
Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.用于治疗儿童和青少年慢性非癌性疼痛的抗抑郁药。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 5;8(8):CD012535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012535.pub2.
9
Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients.非 ICU 住院患者预防谵妄的非药物干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jul 19;7(7):CD013307. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013307.pub2.
10
Selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors for schizophrenia.用于治疗精神分裂症的选择性去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 25;1(1):CD010219. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010219.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.《SPIRIT 2025解释与阐述:随机试验方案更新指南》
BMJ. 2025 Apr 28;389:e081660. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081660.
2
Comments on "The Efficacy and Safety of Botulinum Toxin Type A in Prevention of Hypertrophic Scars After Epicanthoplasty: A Split-Face Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial".关于“A型肉毒杆菌毒素预防内眦赘皮矫正术后增生性瘢痕的疗效和安全性:一项面部双侧双盲随机对照试验”的评论
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Apr 4. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-04847-3.
3
A Systematic Review of Study Design and Placebo Controls in Psychedelic Research.
迷幻药研究中研究设计与安慰剂对照的系统评价
Psychedelic Med (New Rochelle). 2024 Mar 12;2(1):15-24. doi: 10.1089/psymed.2023.0028. eCollection 2024 Mar.
4
What should constitute a control condition in psychedelic drug trials?在迷幻药试验中,什么应构成对照条件?
Nat Ment Health. 2024 Oct;2(10):1152-1160. doi: 10.1038/s44220-024-00321-2. Epub 2024 Sep 30.
5
Side-effects are often a curse. Can they also be a blessing?副作用常常是一种祸端。它们是否也能成为一种福祉呢?
Brain. 2024 Aug 1;147(8):2598-2600. doi: 10.1093/brain/awae220.
6
Impact of active placebo controls on estimated drug effects in randomised trials: a systematic review of trials with both active placebo and standard placebo.活性安慰剂对照对随机试验中估计药物效应的影响:既有活性安慰剂又有标准安慰剂的试验的系统评价。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 6;3(3):MR000055. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000055.pub2.
7
Informed Consent for Placebo-Controlled Trials: Do Ethics and Science Conflict?知情同意书在安慰剂对照试验中的应用:伦理学与科学是否存在冲突?
Ethics Hum Res. 2022 Sep;44(5):42-48. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500142.
8
Randomized controlled trials in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and critical appraisal.新型冠状病毒肺炎患者的随机对照试验:系统评价与批判性评估
Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Sep;122:72-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.05.034. Epub 2022 May 18.
9
The placebo and nocebo effects in functional urology.功能性泌尿学中的安慰剂和反安慰剂效应。
Nat Rev Urol. 2022 Mar;19(3):171-189. doi: 10.1038/s41585-021-00545-2. Epub 2021 Dec 23.
10
Placebo and Side Effects Confound Clinical Trials on New Antitussives.安慰剂和副作用使新型镇咳药临床试验复杂化。
Lung. 2021 Aug;199(4):319-326. doi: 10.1007/s00408-021-00458-2. Epub 2021 Jul 19.