Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao The Journal of Clini...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Article . 2022 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

The Nocebo Response in Pharmacologic Treatments of Primary Headache: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Authors: Yu, Zhang; Yingying, Xu; Shuping, Liu; Jingjing, Liang; Shanghua, Fan; Man, Ding; Juan, Wang; +1 Authors

The Nocebo Response in Pharmacologic Treatments of Primary Headache: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Abstract

AbstractThe nature and magnitude of nocebo responses in primary headache disorders are still unknown. To assess the distribution and possible predictors of nocebo responses in primary headache treatments, databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from 1988 to December 31, 2020, for parallel‐group, double‐blind, randomized placebo‐controlled trials of pharmacologic treatments of primary headaches. The nocebo responses were calculated using a random effects meta‐analysis model. Subgroup and metaregression analyses were performed to determine the associations of study design and demographic characteristics with nocebo responses. A total of 178 randomized controlled trials that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included. Prophylactic treatments elicited stronger nocebo responses than acute treatments. The majority of nocebo adverse events were mild to moderate in severity, with the nervous and digestive systems being the most commonly affected. There was a strong correlation between the active medication and control groups in terms of adverse events, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Long treatment duration, a high proportion of subjects receiving active medications, multicenter design, North America, high body mass index, women, previous treatment experiences, and a high proportion of patients with migraine headache with aura were all found to be significant positive predictors of nocebo responses, whereas the year of publication was found to be inversely related to them. Nocebo effects should be noticed for their contribution to discontinuation of or lack of adherence to active treatments. Clarifying these nocebo‐related risk factors can aid in their clinical prevention and management.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Double-Blind Method, Risk Factors, Migraine Disorders, Headache, Humans, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Female, Nocebo Effect, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    13
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
13
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!