Suppr超能文献

非安慰剂对照确定促进剂干预效果的大小:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Nonplacebo Controls to Determine the Magnitude of Ergogenic Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Applied Physiology and Nutrition Research Group, School of Physical Education and Sport, Rheumatology Division, Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo (University of São Paulo), São Paulo, BRAZIL.

School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UNITED KINGDOM.

出版信息

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021 Aug 1;53(8):1766-1777. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002635.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Placebos are used as a control treatment that is meant to be indistinguishable from the active intervention. However, where substantive placebo effects may occur, studies that do not include a nonplacebo control arm may underestimate the overall effect of the intervention (active plus placebo components). This study aimed to determine the relative magnitude of the placebo effect associated with nutritional supplements (caffeine and extracellular buffers) by meta-analyzing data from studies containing both placebo and nonplacebo control sessions.

METHODS

Bayesian multilevel meta-analysis models were used to estimate pooled effects and express the placebo effect as a percentage of the overall intervention effect.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included, with the median pooled effect size (ES0.5) indicating a very small (ES0.5 = 0.09 (95% credible interval (CrI), 0.01-0.17)) improvement in the performance of placebo compared with control. There was no moderating effect of exercise type (capacity or performance), exercise duration, or training status. The comparison between active intervention and control indicated a small to medium effect (ES0.5 = 0.37 (95% CrI, 0.20-0.56)). Expressed in relative terms, the placebo effect was equivalent to 25% (75% CrI, 16%-35%) and 59% (75% CrI, 34%-94%) of the total intervention effect for buffers and caffeine.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate a very small but potentially important placebo effect with nutritional supplementation studies. A substantive proportion of supplement effects may be due to placebo effects, with the relative proportion influenced by the magnitude of the overall ergogenic effect. Where feasible, intervention studies should use nonplacebo control-arm comparators to identify the proportion of the effect estimated to come from placebo effects and avoid underestimating the overall benefits that the physiological plus psychobiological aspects associated with an intervention provide in the real world.

摘要

简介

安慰剂被用作一种对照治疗,旨在与活性干预措施无法区分。然而,在可能出现实质性安慰剂效应的情况下,不包括非安慰剂对照臂的研究可能会低估干预措施的总体效果(活性加安慰剂成分)。本研究旨在通过对包含安慰剂和非安慰剂对照期的研究数据进行荟萃分析,确定与营养补充剂(咖啡因和细胞外缓冲剂)相关的安慰剂效应的相对大小。

方法

使用贝叶斯多水平荟萃分析模型来估计汇总效应,并将安慰剂效应表示为干预总效应的百分比。

结果

纳入了 34 项研究,中位数汇总效应大小(ES0.5)表明,与对照相比,安慰剂的表现略有改善(ES0.5=0.09(95%可信区间(CrI),0.01-0.17))。运动类型(能力或表现)、运动持续时间或训练状态没有调节作用。与对照相比,活性干预的效果表明为小到中等效应(ES0.5=0.37(95% CrI,0.20-0.56))。以相对术语表示,缓冲剂和咖啡因的安慰剂效应分别相当于总干预效应的 25%(75% CrI,16%-35%)和 59%(75% CrI,34%-94%)。

结论

这些结果表明,营养补充剂研究中存在非常小但潜在重要的安慰剂效应。补充剂效应的很大一部分可能归因于安慰剂效应,其相对比例受总功效的影响。在可行的情况下,干预研究应使用非安慰剂对照臂比较器来确定估计来自安慰剂效应的效果比例,并避免低估与干预相关的生理和心理生物学方面在现实世界中提供的总体益处。

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