9种精神疾病的安慰剂治疗结果差异:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Tom Bschor, Lea Nagel, Josephine Unger, Guido Schwarzer, Christopher Baethge
{"title":"9种精神疾病的安慰剂治疗结果差异:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Tom Bschor, Lea Nagel, Josephine Unger, Guido Schwarzer, Christopher Baethge","doi":"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.0994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Placebo is the only substance systematically evaluated across common psychiatric diagnoses, but comprehensive cross-diagnostic comparisons are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare changes in placebo groups in recent high-quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs) across a broad spectrum of psychiatric disorders in adult patients.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were systematically searched in March 2022 for the latest systematic reviews meeting predetermined high-quality criteria for 9 major psychiatric diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Using these reviews, the top 10 highest-quality (ie, lowest risk of bias, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool) and most recent placebo-controlled RCTs per diagnosis (totaling 90 RCTs) were selected, adhering to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Following the Cochrane Handbook, 2 authors independently carried out the study search, selection, and data extraction. Cross-diagnosis comparisons were based on standardized pre-post effect sizes (mean change divided by its SD) for each placebo group. This study is reported following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline.</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measure: </strong>The primary outcome, pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes (dav) with 95% CIs per diagnosis, was determined using random-effects meta-analyses. A Q test assessed statistical significance of differences across diagnoses. Heterogeneity and small-study effects were evaluated as appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 90 RCTs with 9985 placebo-treated participants were included. Symptom severity improved with placebo in all diagnoses. Pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes differed across diagnoses (Q = 88.5; df = 8; P < .001), with major depressive disorder (dav = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.56) and generalized anxiety disorder (dav = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.41) exhibiting the largest dav. Panic disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social phobia, and mania showed dav between 0.68 and 0.92, followed by OCD (dav = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.78) and schizophrenia (dav = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis found that symptom improvement with placebo treatment was substantial in all conditions but varied across the 9 included diagnoses. These findings may help in assessing the necessity and ethical justification of placebo controls, in evaluating treatment effects in uncontrolled studies, and in guiding patients in treatment decisions. These findings likely encompass the true placebo effect, natural disease course, and nonspecific effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":14800,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11137661/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differential Outcomes of Placebo Treatment Across 9 Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tom Bschor, Lea Nagel, Josephine Unger, Guido Schwarzer, Christopher Baethge\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.0994\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Placebo is the only substance systematically evaluated across common psychiatric diagnoses, but comprehensive cross-diagnostic comparisons are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare changes in placebo groups in recent high-quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs) across a broad spectrum of psychiatric disorders in adult patients.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were systematically searched in March 2022 for the latest systematic reviews meeting predetermined high-quality criteria for 9 major psychiatric diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Using these reviews, the top 10 highest-quality (ie, lowest risk of bias, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool) and most recent placebo-controlled RCTs per diagnosis (totaling 90 RCTs) were selected, adhering to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Following the Cochrane Handbook, 2 authors independently carried out the study search, selection, and data extraction. Cross-diagnosis comparisons were based on standardized pre-post effect sizes (mean change divided by its SD) for each placebo group. This study is reported following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline.</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measure: </strong>The primary outcome, pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes (dav) with 95% CIs per diagnosis, was determined using random-effects meta-analyses. A Q test assessed statistical significance of differences across diagnoses. Heterogeneity and small-study effects were evaluated as appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 90 RCTs with 9985 placebo-treated participants were included. Symptom severity improved with placebo in all diagnoses. Pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes differed across diagnoses (Q = 88.5; df = 8; P < .001), with major depressive disorder (dav = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.56) and generalized anxiety disorder (dav = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.41) exhibiting the largest dav. Panic disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social phobia, and mania showed dav between 0.68 and 0.92, followed by OCD (dav = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.78) and schizophrenia (dav = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis found that symptom improvement with placebo treatment was substantial in all conditions but varied across the 9 included diagnoses. These findings may help in assessing the necessity and ethical justification of placebo controls, in evaluating treatment effects in uncontrolled studies, and in guiding patients in treatment decisions. These findings likely encompass the true placebo effect, natural disease course, and nonspecific effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":22.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11137661/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.0994\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.0994","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:安慰剂是唯一一种对常见精神疾病进行系统评估的物质,但缺乏全面的跨诊断比较:比较近期高质量随机临床试验(RCT)中安慰剂组的变化,这些试验涉及成年患者的多种精神疾病:数据来源:2022 年 3 月,系统检索了 MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 系统性综述数据库中符合预定高质量标准的 9 种主要精神疾病最新系统性综述:利用这些综述,按照预先确定的纳入和排除标准,针对每种诊断选择了前10项质量最高(即根据Cochrane偏倚风险工具,偏倚风险最低)且最新的安慰剂对照RCT(共90项RCT):按照《Cochrane 手册》,两位作者独立进行了研究检索、筛选和数据提取。交叉诊断比较基于各安慰剂组的标准化前后效应大小(平均变化除以其标度)。本研究按照流行病学观察性研究的荟萃分析(MOOSE)报告指南进行报告。主要结果和测量方法:主要结果是采用随机效应荟萃分析确定每项诊断的汇总安慰剂前后效应大小(dav)及 95% CIs。Q检验评估了不同诊断之间差异的统计学意义。对异质性和小型研究效应进行了适当评估:共纳入了 90 项 RCT,9985 名接受过安慰剂治疗的患者。安慰剂可改善所有诊断中的症状严重程度。汇总的安慰剂治疗前-后效应大小在不同诊断中存在差异(Q = 88.5; df = 8; P 结论及相关性:这项系统回顾和荟萃分析发现,在所有情况下,安慰剂治疗对症状的改善都非常明显,但在纳入的 9 种诊断中,安慰剂治疗对症状的改善程度各不相同。这些发现有助于评估安慰剂对照的必要性和道德合理性,有助于评估无对照研究中的治疗效果,也有助于指导患者做出治疗决定。这些发现可能包括真正的安慰剂效应、自然病程和非特异性效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differential Outcomes of Placebo Treatment Across 9 Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Placebo is the only substance systematically evaluated across common psychiatric diagnoses, but comprehensive cross-diagnostic comparisons are lacking.

Objective: To compare changes in placebo groups in recent high-quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs) across a broad spectrum of psychiatric disorders in adult patients.

Data sources: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were systematically searched in March 2022 for the latest systematic reviews meeting predetermined high-quality criteria for 9 major psychiatric diagnoses.

Study selection: Using these reviews, the top 10 highest-quality (ie, lowest risk of bias, according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool) and most recent placebo-controlled RCTs per diagnosis (totaling 90 RCTs) were selected, adhering to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Data extraction and synthesis: Following the Cochrane Handbook, 2 authors independently carried out the study search, selection, and data extraction. Cross-diagnosis comparisons were based on standardized pre-post effect sizes (mean change divided by its SD) for each placebo group. This study is reported following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline.

Main outcome and measure: The primary outcome, pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes (dav) with 95% CIs per diagnosis, was determined using random-effects meta-analyses. A Q test assessed statistical significance of differences across diagnoses. Heterogeneity and small-study effects were evaluated as appropriate.

Results: A total of 90 RCTs with 9985 placebo-treated participants were included. Symptom severity improved with placebo in all diagnoses. Pooled pre-post placebo effect sizes differed across diagnoses (Q = 88.5; df = 8; P < .001), with major depressive disorder (dav = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.56) and generalized anxiety disorder (dav = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.41) exhibiting the largest dav. Panic disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social phobia, and mania showed dav between 0.68 and 0.92, followed by OCD (dav = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.78) and schizophrenia (dav = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.76).

Conclusion and relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that symptom improvement with placebo treatment was substantial in all conditions but varied across the 9 included diagnoses. These findings may help in assessing the necessity and ethical justification of placebo controls, in evaluating treatment effects in uncontrolled studies, and in guiding patients in treatment decisions. These findings likely encompass the true placebo effect, natural disease course, and nonspecific effects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA Psychiatry
JAMA Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
30.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
233
期刊介绍: JAMA Psychiatry is a global, peer-reviewed journal catering to clinicians, scholars, and research scientists in psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and related fields. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry originated in 1919, splitting into two journals in 1959: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, these evolved into JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Psychiatry is affiliated with the JAMA Network, a group of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信