The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients: An empirical investigation
Abstract
In order to investigate external factors that may influence the magnitude of placebo analgesia as well as psychological factors that mediate placebo analgesia, 13 irritable bowl syndrome (IBS) patients rated evoked rectal distension and cutaneous heat pain under the conditions of natural history (NH), rectal placebo (RP), rectal nocebo (RN), rectal lidocaine (RL) and oral lidocaine (OL). Patients were given verbal suggestions for pain relief and rated expected pain levels and desire for pain relief for both evoked visceral and cutaneous pain, respectively. Large reductions in pain intensity and pain unpleasantness ratings were found in the RP, RL and OL condition as compared to the natural history condition, whereas no significant difference in pain reduction between the three treatment conditions was found. Ratings during RN and NH were not statistically different. Compared to a previous study, which shows that rectal lidocaine reverses visceral and cutaneous hyperalgesia, these results suggest that adding a verbal suggestion for pain relief can increase the magnitude of placebo analgesia to that of an active agent. Since IBS patients rate these stimuli as much higher than do normal control subjects and since placebo effects were very large, they probably reflect anti-hyperalgesic mechanisms to a major extent. Expected pain levels and desire for pain relief accounted for large amounts of the variance in visceral pain intensity in the RP, RL, and OL condition (up to 81%), and for lower amounts of the variance in cutaneous pain intensity. Hence, the combination of expected pain levels and desire for pain relief may offer an alternative means of assessing the contribution of placebo factors during analgesia.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain
Thompson, W. G., Longstreth, G. F., Drossman, D. A., Heaton, K. W., Irvine, E. J., & Müller-Lissner, S. A. (1999) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gut.45.2008.ii43 · Cited by 2,440
Price, D. D., Bush, F. M., Long, S., & Harkins, S. W. (1994) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(94)90097-3 · Cited by 1,174 · cited 5×
“Perceived pain intensity and unpleasantness were measured via a mechanical visual analogue scale (M-VAS) (Price et al., 1994).”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationHow expectancies shape experience.
(1999) · doi:10.1037/10332-000 · Cited by 639
Response expectancies in placebo analgesia and their clinical relevance
Pollo, A., Amanzio, M., Arslanian, A., Casadio, C., Maggi, G., & Benedetti, F. (2001) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(01)00296-2 · Cited by 442
A comparison of placebo effects in clinical analgesic trials versus studies of placebo analgesia
Vase, L., Riley, J. L., & Price, D. D. (2002) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00205-1 · Cited by 434 · cited 5×
“The magnitude of placebo analgesia has been shown to be influenced by the type of suggestion given for pain relief (Pollo et al., 2001; Vase et al., 2002).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationThe role of conditioning and verbal expectancy in the placebo response
Voudouris, N. J., Peck, C. L., & Coleman, G. (1990) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(90)90057-k · Cited by 369
De Pascalis, V., Chiaradia, C., & Carotenuto, E. (2002) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(01)00485-7 · Cited by 249
Cited by
A Comprehensive Review of the Placebo Effect: Recent Advances and Current Thought
Price, D. D., Finniss, D. G., & Benedetti, F. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.113006.095941 · Cited by 1,146
Self-citationThe neuroscience of placebo effects: connecting context, learning and health
Wager, T. D., & Atlas, L. Y. (2015) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3976 · Cited by 844
Assessment and manifestation of central sensitisation across different chronic pain conditions
Arendt‐Nielsen, L., Morlion, B., Perrot, S., Dahan, A., Dickenson, A., Kress, H. G., Wells, C., Bouhassira, D., & Drewes, A. M. (2018) · European Journal of Pain · doi:10.1002/ejp.1140 · Cited by 695
(2020) · doi:10.1056/nejmra1907805 · Cited by 634
Placebo effects on human μ-opioid activity during pain
Wager, T. D., Scott, D. J., & Zubieta, J.-K. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0702413104 · Cited by 562
Metadata
- Authors
- Vase, L., Robinson, M. E., Verne, N. G., & Price, D. D.
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2003-09
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17-25
- ISSN
- 0304-3959
- OpenAlex
- W2108733839
- Cited by
- 370
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 7.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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 contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients: An empirical investigation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00073-3
- The paper
- Vase, L., Robinson, M. E., Verne, N. G., & Price, D. D. (2003). The contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients: An empirical investigation. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00073-3
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.