2016
DOI: 10.1007/s12160-016-9772-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

You Can’t Always Get What You Want: The Influence of Choice on Nocebo and Placebo Responding

Abstract: Not being given a choice of medication increased the nocebo effect and reduced the placebo response to the treatment.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
18
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, a lack of perceived choice over treatments—even when treatments are actually identical—can contribute to worse health outcomes (Chilvers et al, ; Geers et al, ; Handelzalts & Keinan, )—likely in part because this absence of choice can lead to heightened negative expectations (Bennett, Calman, Curtis, & Fischbacher‐Smith, ). Lack of choice can increase nocebo effects with respect to both the experience of unpleasant side effects and diminished treatment effectiveness (Bartley, Faasse, Horne, & Petrie, ; Geers & Rose, ; Rose, Geers, Rasinski, & Fowler, ). Future research would benefit from further examination of potential moderators of nocebo effects, for example the number of symptoms listed as treatment side effects, and whether active placebos (i.e., placebos that produce noticeable administration effects such as tingling or dry mouth) result in more nocebo side effects than inert placebos.…”
Section: Mechanisms Underlying Nocebo Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, a lack of perceived choice over treatments—even when treatments are actually identical—can contribute to worse health outcomes (Chilvers et al, ; Geers et al, ; Handelzalts & Keinan, )—likely in part because this absence of choice can lead to heightened negative expectations (Bennett, Calman, Curtis, & Fischbacher‐Smith, ). Lack of choice can increase nocebo effects with respect to both the experience of unpleasant side effects and diminished treatment effectiveness (Bartley, Faasse, Horne, & Petrie, ; Geers & Rose, ; Rose, Geers, Rasinski, & Fowler, ). Future research would benefit from further examination of potential moderators of nocebo effects, for example the number of symptoms listed as treatment side effects, and whether active placebos (i.e., placebos that produce noticeable administration effects such as tingling or dry mouth) result in more nocebo side effects than inert placebos.…”
Section: Mechanisms Underlying Nocebo Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For subjects on prophylactic treatment, a significant increase in ABR was also observed, but only for non‐joint bleeds. The implementation of CBDR in 2015, a user‐friendly web‐based tool for patients to report bleeds and infusions, could have introduced a bias in improved reporting of bleeds and perhaps also driven by the feeling of insecurity for PWH having to switch products for non‐health‐related reasons . Still, all the ABRs before and after the switch were comparable or even lower than those reported in the literature for PWH with on‐demand or prophylactic treatments …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Örneğin; farklı tedavi rejimlerine rastgele atanma, hastalara bu konuda bir tercih hakkı verilmemesi, bir seçeneğe sahip olmamanın bir nosebo etkiye yol açabileceği ve plasebo etkisini azaltabileceği düşünülebilir. 46 Ayrıca, kontrol grubu; bekleme listesindeki veya girişimsel olmayan bir gruptaki hastalardan oluşuyorsa, bu gruba randomize edilen hastalar herhangi bir tedavi almadan çalışmayı tamamlayacaklarından, bunlar için iki taraflı bir ön yargı vardır: Bu hastalar sadece kör değildir ve aynı zamanda tedavi beklenti-leri karşılanmamıştır. Çünkü herhangi bir tedavi görmeyen hastada ilgili semptomların ortaya çıkması, kötüleşmesi veya en iyi ihtimalle iyileşmenin yavaşlaması şeklinde sonuçlanacaktır.…”
Section: Kli̇ni̇k çAlişmalarda Nosebo Etki̇si̇unclassified