Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 153 of the 153 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The placebo effect: From concepts to genes

Open access
Colagiuri, B., Schenk, L.A., Kessler, M.D., Dorsey, S.G., Colloca, L.·2015·Neuroscience

Abstract

Despite its initial treatment as a nuisance variable, the placebo effect is now recognized as a powerful determinant of health across many different diseases and encounters. This is in light of some remarkable findings ranging from demonstrations that the placebo effect significantly modulates the response to active treatments in conditions such as pain, anxiety, Parkinson’s disease, and some surgical procedures. Here, we review pioneering studies and recent advances in behavioral, neurobiological, and genetic influences on the placebo effect. Based on a previous developed conceptual framework, the placebo effect is presented as the product of a general expectancy learning mechanism in which verbal, conditioned and social cues are centrally integrated to change behaviors and outcomes. Examples of the integration of verbal and conditioned cues, such as instructed reversal of placebo effects are also incorporated into this model. We discuss neuroimaging studies that using well-established behavioral paradigms have identified key brain regions and modulatory mechanisms underlying placebo effects. Finally, we present a synthesis of recent genetics studies on the placebo effect, highlighting a promising link between genetic variants in the dopamine, opioid, serotonin, and endocannabinoid pathways and placebo responsiveness. Greater understanding of the behavioral, neurobiological, and genetic influences on the placebo effect is critical for evaluating medical interventions and may allow health professionals to tailor and personalize interventions in order to maximize treatment outcomes in clinical settings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.08.017

Cites

153 of 153 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 153 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bhathena, 2013, Association of dopamine-related genetic loci to dopamine D3 receptor antagonist ABT-925 clinical response, Transl Psychiatry, 3, e245, 10.1038/tp.2013.22 · doi:10.1038/tp.2013.22
  2. Ikemi, 1962, A psychosomatic study of contagious dermatitis Kyushu, J Med Sci, 13, 335
  3. Kaptchuk, 2009, Placebo controls, Placebo controls, exorcisms, and the devil, 1234

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Colagiuri, B., Schenk, L. A., Kessler, M. D., Dorsey, S. G., & Colloca, L.
Venue
Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
307
Pages
171-190
ISSN
0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1141235294
Cited by
258
References
153
FWCI
12.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
  • University of Maryland Baltimore
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (P30NR014129, R01NR012686)
  • University of Sydney Australia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The placebo effect: From concepts to genes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.08.017
The paper
Colagiuri, B., Schenk, L. A., Kessler, M. D., Dorsey, S. G., & Colloca, L. (2015). The placebo effect: From concepts to genes. Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.08.017

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.