Cited by 72Pain Management and Placebo EffectStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Randomised controlled trials may underestimate drug effects: balanced placebo trial design

Open access
Lund, Karen, Vase, Lene, Petersen, Gitte L., Jensen, Troels S., Finnerup, Nanna B.·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is an inherent assumption in randomised controlled trials that the drug effect can be estimated by subtracting the response during placebo from the response during active drug treatment. OBJECTIVE: To test the assumption of additivity. The primary hypothesis was that the total treatment effect is smaller than the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect. The secondary hypothesis was that non-additivity was most pronounced in participants with large placebo effects. METHODS: We used a within-subject randomised blinded balanced placebo design and included 48 healthy volunteers (50% males), mean (SD) age 23.4 (6.2) years. Experimental pain was induced by injections of hypertonic saline into the masseter muscle. Participants received four injections with hypertonic saline along with lidocaine or matching placebo in randomised order: A: received hypertonic saline/told hypertonic saline; B: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline; C: received hypertonic saline+placebo/told hypertonic saline+pain killer; D: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline+pain killer. The primary outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC, mm(2)) of pain intensity during injections. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect (mean AUC 6279 mm(2) (95% CI, 4936-7622)) and the total treatment effect (mean AUC 5455 mm(2) (95% CI, 4585-6324)) (P = 0.049). This difference was larger for participants with large versus small placebo effects (P = 0.015), and the difference correlated significantly with the size of the placebo effect (r = 0.65, P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Although this study examined placebo effects and not the whole placebo response as in randomised controlled trials, it does suggest that the additivity assumption may be incorrect, and that the estimated drug effects in randomised controlled trials may be underestimated, particularly in studies reporting large placebo responses. The implications for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews need to be discussed.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0084104

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lund, K., Vase, L., Petersen, G. L., Jensen, T. S., & Finnerup, N. B.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University Hospital (DK)
  • Aarhus University (DK)
Corresponding author
Lund, Karen
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-01-08
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
e84104
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071723910
Cited by
72
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5
FWCI
5.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Pfizer
  • AstraZeneca
  • European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (FP7/20072013)
  • European Commission (115007, 2007–2013, FP7 2007-2013, FP7/2007)
  • Astellas Pharma
  • Innovative Medicines Initiative (FP7/2007‐2013, 115007)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
placebo effect, additivity assumption, lidocaine, experimental pain, placebo response
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Lidocaine, Male, Pain, Placebos, Saline Solution, Hypertonic, Young Adult

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