Literature DB >> 17279525

Interpreting the magnitude of the placebo effect: mountain or Molehill?

John Hunsley1, Robin Westmacott.   

Abstract

The ambiguity involved in interpreting numbers and words is central to Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche's (this issue) claim of "powerful spin" in the Wampold, Minami, Tierney, Baskin, and Bhati (2005) re-analysis of their meta-analytic findings on the placebo effect in medicine. Meta-analytic results reported by the two sets of authors are nearly identical, yet their conclusions differ dramatically. In our comment, we discuss the findings of the respective authors and consider options for representing and interpreting the magnitude of meta-analytic effect size estimates. We conclude that although the meta-analyses described indicate that placebo effects do exist and cannot be dismissed as unimportant, given contextual information, it is consistent with existing research to describe the obtained mean effect size for placebos in medicine as small in magnitude.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17279525     DOI: 10.1002/jclp.20352

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9762


  2 in total

1.  The use of pure and impure placebo interventions in primary care - a qualitative approach.

Authors:  Rahel Fent; Thomas Rosemann; Margrit Fässler; Oliver Senn; Carola A Huber
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 2.497

2.  Understanding the nature and mechanism of foot pain.

Authors:  Fiona Hawke; Joshua Burns
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2009-01-14       Impact factor: 2.303

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.