Original Article| Volume 61, ISSUE 3, P256-260, March 2008

Trial methodology and patient characteristics did not influence the size of placebo effects on pain



      To determine whether trial-design, patient-type, or placebo-type factors influence the size of the placebo analgesic effect in clinical trials.

      Study Design and Setting

      Trials that measured pain outcomes in Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche's meta-analysis were retrieved and coded for eight factors potentially predictive of placebo effect size. Random effects meta-regression was used to explore the predictive power of each factor on placebo effect size. The factors investigated aspects of trial design (nonstandardized co-analgesia, co-intervention), patients (pain type, patient group, residual pain score), and placebo (placebo type, indistinguishability, structural equivalence). The meta-analysis undertaken in the original study was also repeated to confirm the results.


      The pooled effect of placebo was 3.2 points on a 100-point scale (95% confidence interval [CI]=1.6–4.7). None of the selected factors influenced the size of placebo effect: the effect of all factors was close to zero, all CIs spanned 0, and P-values ranged from 0.13 to 0.90.


      This study confirms the findings of previous researchers that, at present, the evidence for large placebo analgesic effects in clinical trials is lacking. Importantly, this analysis also establishes that larger placebo effects are not associated with particular aspects of the trial methodology, patient, or placebo type.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Beecher H.
        The powerful placebo.
        JAMA. 1955; 159: 1602-1606
        • Hróbjartsson A.
        • Gotzsche P.
        Is placebo powerless?.
        N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1594-1602
        • Hróbjartsson A.
        • Gotzsche P.
        Is placebo powerless? Update of a systematic review with 52 new randomized trials comparing placebo with no treatment.
        J Intern Med. 2004; 256: 91-100
        • Wager T.
        • Rilling J.
        • Smith E.
        • Sokolik A.
        • Casey K.
        • Davidson R.
        • et al.
        Placebo-induced changes in fMRI in the anticipation and experience of pain.
        Science. 2004; 303: 1162-1167
        • Spiegel D.
        Placebos in practice: doctors use them, they work in some conditions, but we don't know how they work.
        BMJ. 2004; 329: 927-928
        • Stewart-Williams S.
        • Podd J.
        The placebo effect: dissolving the expectancy versus conditioning debate.
        Psychol Bull. 2004; 130: 324-340
        • Evans D.
        Placebo. Mind over matter in modern medicine.
        2nd edition. Harper Collins Publishers, London2004
        • Spiegel D.
        • Kraemer H.
        • Carlson R.
        Is the placebo powerless?.
        N Engl J Med. 2001; 345 ([Letter]): 1276
        • Einarson T.E.
        • Hemels M.
        • Stolk P.
        Is the placebo powerless?.
        N Engl J Med. 2001; 345 ([Letter]): 1277
        • Hróbjartsson A.
        What are the main methodological problems in the estimation of placebo effects?.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2002; 55: 430-435
      1. Green S, Deeks J, Savio F. Meta-analysis of continuous data: does the end justify the mean? In: BMC Abstracts: 9th International Cochrane Colloquium: 2001; Lyon, France; 2001.

        • Baskin T.
        • Tierney C.
        • Minami T.
        • Wampold B.
        Establishing specificity in psychotherapy: a meta-analysis of structural equivalence of placebo controls.
        J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003; 71: 973-979
        • Wampold B.
        • Minami T.
        • Tierney S.
        • Baskin T.
        • Bhati K.
        The placebo is powerful: estimating placebo effects in medicine and psychotherapy from randomized clinical trials.
        J Clin Psychol. 2005; 61: 835-854
        • Benedetti F.
        • Arduino C.
        • Costa S.
        • Vighetti S.
        • Tarenzi L.
        • Rainero I.
        • et al.
        Loss of expectation-related mechanisms in Alzheimer's disease makes analgesic therapies less effective.
        Pain. 2006; 121: 133-144
        • Vase L.
        • Riley J.
        • Price D.
        A comparison of placebo effects in clinical analgesic trials versus studies of placebo analgesia.
        Pain. 2002; 99: 443-452
        • de Pascalis V.
        • Chiaradia C.
        • Carotenuto E.
        The contribution of suggestibility and expectation to placebo analgesia phenomenon in an experimental setting.
        Pain. 2002; 96: 393-402
        • Price D.
        • Milling L.
        • Kirsch I.
        • Duff A.
        • Montgomery G.
        • Nicholls S.
        An analysis of factors that contribute to the magnitude of placebo analgesia in an experimental paradigm.
        Pain. 1999; 83: 147-156
        • Pollo A.
        • Amanzio M.
        • Arslanian A.
        • Casadio C.
        • Maggi G.
        • Benedetti F.
        Response expectancies in placebo analgesia and their clinical relevance.
        Pain. 2001; 93: 77-84
        • Hróbjartsson A.
        The uncontrollable placebo effect.
        Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1996; 50: 345-348
        • Hróbjartsson A.
        • Gøtzsche P.C.
        Unsubstantiated claims of large effects of placebo on pain: serious errors in meta-analysis of placebo analgesia mechanism studies.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59: 336-338
        • Jüni P.
        • Altman G.
        • Egger M.
        Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.
        BMJ. 2001; 323: 42-46