Attention placebo control in randomized controlled trials of psychosocial interventions: theory and practice.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Popp L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4404062 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Attention placebo control in randomized controlled trials of psychosocial interventions: theory and practice.
Popp Lukka L Schneider Silvia S
Trials 20150411
<h4>Unlabelled</h4>Attention placebo control (APC) is considered a highly valid control condition when conducting trials of social interventions. Unfortunately, an appropriate APC condition is rarely used. This letter discusses the tension between methodological and ethical requirements of an APC group in psychosocial interventions based on our experiences with a randomized controlled efficacy study of a parent training program. To prevent negative side effects and high drop-out rates, feasible ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The registration of clinical trials has been promoted to prevent publication bias and increase research transparency. Despite general agreement about the minimum amount of information needed for trial registration, we lack clear guidance on descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions in trial registries. We aimed to evaluate the quality of registry descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions assessed in ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patient education.On 6 May 2009, we searched for all ongoing RCTs registered in the 10 trial registries accessible through the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We included trials evaluating an educational intervention (that is, designed to teach or train patients about their own health) and dedicated to participants, their family members or home caregivers. We used a standardized data extraction form to collect data related to the description of the experimental intervention, the centers, and the caregivers.We selected 268 of 642 potentially eligible studies and appraised a random sample of 150 records. All selected trials were registered in 4 registers, mainly ClinicalTrials.gov (61%). The median [interquartile range] target sample size was 205 [100 to 400] patients. The comparator was mainly usual care (47%) or active treatment (47%). A minority of records (17%, 95% CI 11 to 23%) reported an overall adequate description of the intervention (that is, description that reported the content, mode of delivery, number, frequency, duration of sessions and overall duration of the intervention). Further, for most reports (59%), important information about the content of the intervention was missing. The description of the mode of delivery of the intervention was reported for 52% of studies, the number of sessions for 74%, the frequency of sessions for 58%, the duration of each session for 45% and the overall duration for 63%. Information about the caregivers was missing for 70% of trials. Most trials (73%) took place in the United States or United Kingdom, 64% involved only one centre, and participating centers were mainly tertiary-care, academic or university hospitals (51%).Educational interventions assessed in ongoing RCTs of educational interventions are poorly described in trial registries. The lack of adequate description raises doubts about the ability of trial registration to help patients and researchers know about the treatment evaluated in trials of education.
| S-EPMC3503701 | biostudies-other
Project description:AimsThe difference in the benefit of invasive cardiovascular interventions compared with placebo controls has not been analysed systematically.Methods and resultsMEDLINE and Web of Science were searched through 29 March 2020. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of invasive cardiovascular interventions (including catheter-based interventions and pacemaker-like devices) investigating predefined primary outcomes were included. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and odds ratios were calculated for continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Meta-regression analyses were performed to assess whether estimates of treatment effects were associated with methodological characteristics of trials. Thirty trials, including 4102 patients, were analysed. The overall risk of bias was judged to be low in only 43% of the trials. Ten trials (33%) demonstrated statistically significant superiority of invasive interventions over placebo controls for the respective predefined primary outcomes. In almost half of the 16 trials investigating continuous predefined primary outcomes, the SMD between the active and placebo procedure indicated a small (n = 4) to moderate (n = 3) treatment effect of active treatment over placebo. In contrast, one trial indicated a small treatment effect in favour of the placebo procedure. In the remaining trials, there was no relevant treatment effect of active treatment over placebo. In trials with a protocol-mandated stable and symmetrical use of co-interventions, the superiority of active procedures vs. invasive placebo procedures was significantly larger as compared with trials with frequent or unbalanced changes in co-interventions (P for interaction 0.027).ConclusionsThe additional treatment effect of invasive cardiovascular interventions compared with placebo controls was small in most trials.
| S-EPMC7360382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of process interventions (education for clinicians, parent presence, education of parents [before and on day of vaccination], and education of patients on day of vaccination) on reducing vaccination pain, fear, and distress and increasing the use of interventions during vaccination.Design/methodsDatabases were searched using a broad search strategy to identify relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Critical outcomes were pain, fear, distress (when applicable), and use of pain management interventions. Data were extracted according to procedure phase (preprocedure, acute, recovery, combinations of these) and pooled using established methods. Analyses were conducted using standardized mean differences (SMD) and risk ratios (RR).ResultsThirteen studies were included. Results were generally mixed. On the basis of low to very low-quality evidence, the following specific critical outcomes showed significant effects suggesting: (1) clinicians should be educated about vaccine injection pain management (use of interventions: SMD 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47, 0.85); (2) parents should be present (distress preprocedure: SMD -0.85; 95% CI: -1.35, -0.35); (3) parents should be educated before the vaccination day (use of intervention preprocedure: SMD 0.83; 95% CI: 0.25, 1.41 and RR, 2.08; 95% CI: 1.51, 2.86; distress acute: SMD, -0.35; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.13); (4) parents should be educated on the vaccination day (use of interventions: SMD 1.02; 95% CI: 0.22, 1.83 and RR, 2.42; 95% CI: 1.47, 3.99; distress preprocedure+acute+recovery: SMD -0.48; 95% CI: -0.82, -0.15); and (5) individuals 3 years of age and above should be educated on the day of vaccination (fear preprocedure: SMD -0.67; 95% CI: -1.28, -0.07).ConclusionsEducating individuals involved in the vaccination procedure (clinicians, parents of children being vaccinated; individuals above 3 y of age) is beneficial to increase use of pain management strategies, reduce distress surrounding with vaccination, and to reduce fear. When possible, parent presence is also recommended for children undergoing vaccination.
| S-EPMC4900433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility is a common complication in acute, critically ill, postoperative, and chronic patients that may lead to impaired nutrient delivery, poor clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. Several pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions to treat GI dysmotility were investigated in dozens of clinical studies. However, they often yielded conflicting results, at least in part, because various (nonstandardized) definitions of GI dysmotility were used and methodological quality of studies was poor. While a universally accepted definition of GI dysmotility is yet to be developed, a systematic analysis of data derived from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials may provide robust data on absolute and relative effectiveness of various interventions as the study outcome (GI motility) was assessed in the least biased manner.To systematically review data from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials to determine and compare the effectiveness of interventions that affect GI motility.Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and EMBASE) were searched. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The summary estimates were reported as mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).A total of 38 double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials involving 2371 patients were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. These studies investigated a total of 20 different interventions, of which 6 interventions were meta-analyzed. Of them, the use of dopamine receptor antagonists (MD, -8.99; 95% CI, -17.72 to -0.27; P = 0.04) and macrolides (MD, -26.04; 95% CI, -51.25 to -0.82; P = 0.04) significantly improved GI motility compared with the placebo group. The use of botulism toxin significantly impaired GI motility compared with the placebo group (MD, 5.31; 95% CI, -0.04 to 10.67; P = 0.05). Other interventions (dietary factors, probiotics, hormones) did not affect GI motility.Based on the best available data and taking into account the safety profile of each class of intervention, dopamine receptor antagonists and macrolides significantly improve GI motility and are medications of choice in treating GI dysmotility.
| S-EPMC4748872 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTo date different vaginal gel microbicides have been evaluated in phase 2b/3 trials, but none have demonstrated effectiveness for preventing HIV infection. Failure to demonstrate effectiveness however does not necessarily indicate that a product is truly inefficacious, as several sources of efficacy dilution may compromise our ability to identify products that may have been truly efficacious.MethodsFor four individual sources of dilution, we describe the dilution mechanisms and quantify the expected effectiveness. An overall expected effectiveness that combines all sources of dilution in a trial is derived as well.ResultsUnder conditions that have been observed in recent microbicide trials, the overall expected effectiveness assuming an active gel with true efficacy of 50% and 75% are in the range of [16%; 33%] and [28%; 50%], respectively, when considering the four major sources of dilution. In contrast the diluting effect due to adherence alone (assuming an adherence of 80%) leads to higher expected effectiveness, 40% and 60% assuming an active gel with true efficacy of 50% and 75%, respectively. Individual sources of dilution may demonstrate a small effect when evaluated independently, but the overall dilution effect in a trial with several sources of dilution can be quite substantial.ConclusionCurrently planned phase 2b/3 microbicide trials of new candidate vaginal microbicides are not immune from these shortcomings. A good understanding of dilution effects is necessary to properly interpret microbicide trial results and to identify products worthy of further development and evaluation. Greater attention should be devoted to reducing and assessing the impact of efficacy dilution and to carefully selecting the effect size in the design of future trials.
| S-EPMC2768687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the short-term and long-term effects of dichlorphenamide (DCP) on attack frequency and quality of life in hyperkalemic (HYP) and hypokalemic (HOP) periodic paralysis.MethodsTwo multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials lasted 9 weeks (Class I evidence), followed by a 1-year extension phase in which all participants received DCP. Forty-four HOP and 21 HYP participants participated. The primary outcome variable was the average number of attacks per week over the final 8 weeks of the double-blind phase.ResultsThe median attack rate was lower in HOP participants on DCP than in participants on placebo (0.3 vs 2.4, p = 0.02). The 9-week mean change in the Physical Component Summary score of the Short Form-36 was also better in HOP participants receiving DCP (treatment effect = 7.29 points, 95% confidence interval 2.26 to 12.32, p = 0.006). The median attack rate was also lower in HYP participants on DCP (0.9 vs 4.8) than in participants on placebo, but the difference in median attack rate was not significant (p = 0.10). There were no significant effects of DCP on muscle strength or muscle mass in either trial. The most common adverse events in both trials were paresthesia (47% DCP vs 14% placebo, both trials combined) and confusion (19% DCP vs 7% placebo, both trials combined).ConclusionsDCP is effective in reducing the attack frequency, is safe, and improves quality of life in HOP periodic paralysis.Classification of evidenceThese studies provide Class I evidence that DCP significantly reduces attack frequency in HOP but lacked the precision to support either efficacy or lack of efficacy of DCP in HYP.
| S-EPMC4831040 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of physical and procedural interventions for reducing pain and related outcomes during vaccination.Design/methodsDatabases were searched using a broad search strategy to identify relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Data were extracted according to procedure phase (preprocedure, acute, recovery, and combinations of these) and pooled using established methods.ResultsA total of 31 studies were included. Acute infant distress was diminished during intramuscular injection without aspiration (n=313): standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.18, -0.46). Injecting the most painful vaccine last during vaccinations reduced acute infant distress (n=196): SMD -0.69 (95% CI: -0.98, -0.4). Simultaneous injections reduced acute infant distress compared with sequential injections (n=172): SMD -0.56 (95% CI: -0.87, -0.25). There was no benefit of simultaneous injections in children. Less infant distress during the acute and recovery phases combined occurred with vastus lateralis (vs. deltoid) injections (n=185): SMD -0.70 (95% CI: -1.00, -0.41). Skin-to-skin contact in neonates (n=736) reduced acute distress: SMD -0.65 (95% CI: -1.05, -0.25). Holding infants reduced acute distress after removal of the data from 1 methodologically diverse study (n=107): SMD -1.25 (95% CI: -2.05, -0.46). Holding after vaccination (n=417) reduced infant distress during the acute and recovery phases combined: SMD -0.65 (95% CI: -1.08, -0.22). Self-reported fear was reduced for children positioned upright (n=107): SMD -0.39 (95% CI: -0.77, -0.01). Non-nutritive sucking (n=186) reduced acute distress in infants: SMD -1.88 (95% CI: -2.57, -1.18). Manual tactile stimulation did not reduce pain across the lifespan. An external vibrating device and cold reduced pain in children (n=145): SMD -1.23 (95% CI: -1.58, -0.87). There was no benefit of warming the vaccine in adults. Muscle tension was beneficial in selected indices of fainting in adolescents and adults.ConclusionsInterventions with evidence of benefit in select populations include: no aspiration, injecting most painful vaccine last, simultaneous injections, vastus lateralis injection, positioning interventions, non-nutritive sucking, external vibrating device with cold, and muscle tension.
| S-EPMC4900423 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the safety and efficacy of ABT-089, a novel ?(4)?(2) neuronal nicotinic receptor partial agonist, vs. placebo in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of children 6 through 12 years of age were conducted. Study 1 (n = 274) assessed six treatment groups over 8 weeks: 4 once-daily (QD) ABT-089 doses (0.085-0.700 mg/kg), QD atomoxetine, and placebo. Study 2 (n = 119) assessed three treatment groups over 6 weeks: 2 QD ABT-089 doses (0.7 mg/kg, 1.4 mg/kg) and placebo. The primary efficacy variable was the investigator-administered Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV: Home Version (ADHD-RS-IV [HV]) Total Score. Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring, laboratory tests, vital signs, physical examinations, and electrocardiogram measures.There was no statistically significant difference between ABT-089 and placebo in mean change from baseline to final evaluation of ADHD-RS-IV (HV) Total Score or other outcome measures at any dose in either study. In Study 1, atomoxetine showed statistically significant improvement for the primary and most secondary endpoints. ABT-089 was generally safe and well tolerated, with no statistically significant difference between any ABT-089 dose and placebo in the overall incidence of any specific AE, and no clinically significant changes in other safety measures.ABT-089 did not show efficacy on the primary efficacy variable, the ADHD-RS-IV (HV) Total Score, or other measures of ADHD symptomatology in children with ADHD, and had a safety profile similar to placebo. These results contrast with published reports of efficacy of nicotinic modulators in adults with ADHD.
| S-EPMC3757954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHospitals, clinics, and health organizations have provided psychosocial support interventions for medical patients to supplement curative care. Prior reviews of interventions augmenting psychosocial support in medical settings have reported mixed outcomes. This meta-analysis addresses the questions of how effective are psychosocial support interventions in improving patient survival and which potential moderating features are associated with greater effectiveness.Methods and findingsWe evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychosocial support interventions in inpatient and outpatient healthcare settings reporting survival data, including studies reporting disease-related or all-cause mortality. Literature searches included studies reported January 1980 through October 2020 accessed from Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Alt HealthWatch, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Google Scholar databases. At least 2 reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality, with at least 2 independent reviewers also extracting data and assessing study quality. Odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) data were analyzed separately using random effects weighted models. Of 42,054 studies searched, 106 RCTs including 40,280 patients met inclusion criteria. Patient average age was 57.2 years, with 52% females and 48% males; 42% had cardiovascular disease (CVD), 36% had cancer, and 22% had other conditions. Across 87 RCTs reporting data for discrete time periods, the average was OR = 1.20 (95% CI = 1.09 to 1.31, p < 0.001), indicating a 20% increased likelihood of survival among patients receiving psychosocial support compared to control groups receiving standard medical care. Among those studies, psychosocial interventions explicitly promoting health behaviors yielded improved likelihood of survival, whereas interventions without that primary focus did not. Across 22 RCTs reporting survival time, the average was HR = 1.29 (95% CI = 1.12 to 1.49, p < 0.001), indicating a 29% increased probability of survival over time among intervention recipients compared to controls. Among those studies, meta-regressions identified 3 moderating variables: control group type, patient disease severity, and risk of research bias. Studies in which control groups received health information/classes in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) averaged weaker effects than those in which control groups received only TAU. Studies with patients having relatively greater disease severity tended to yield smaller gains in survival time relative to control groups. In one of 3 analyses, studies with higher risk of research bias tended to report better outcomes. The main limitation of the data is that interventions very rarely blinded personnel and participants to study arm, such that expectations for improvement were not controlled.ConclusionsIn this meta-analysis, OR data indicated that psychosocial behavioral support interventions promoting patient motivation/coping to engage in health behaviors improved patient survival, but interventions focusing primarily on patients' social or emotional outcomes did not prolong life. HR data indicated that psychosocial interventions, predominantly focused on social or emotional outcomes, improved survival but yielded similar effects to health information/classes and were less effective among patients with apparently greater disease severity. Risk of research bias remains a plausible threat to data interpretation.
| S-EPMC8130925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interventions to assist individuals in initiating and maintaining regular participation in physical activity are not always effective. Psychological and behavioral theories advocate the importance of both motivation and volition in interventions to change health behavior. Interventions adopting self-regulation strategies that foster motivational and volitional components may, therefore, have utility in promoting regular physical activity participation. We tested the efficacy of an intervention adopting motivational (mental simulation) and volitional (implementation intentions) components to promote a regular physical activity in two studies. Study 1 adopted a cluster randomized design in which participants (n = 92) were allocated to one of three conditions: mental simulation plus implementation intention, implementation intention only, or control. Study 2 adopted a 2 (mental simulation vs. no mental simulation) × 2 (implementation intention vs. no implementation intention) randomized controlled design in which fitness center attendees (n = 184) were randomly allocated one of four conditions: mental simulation only, implementation intention only, combined, or control. Physical activity behavior was measured by self-report (Study 1) or fitness center attendance (Study 2) at 4- (Studies 1 and 2) and 19- (Study 2 only) week follow-up periods. Findings revealed no statistically significant main or interactive effects of the mental simulation and implementation intention conditions on physical activity outcomes in either study. Findings are in contrast to previous research which has found pervasive effects for both intervention strategies. Findings are discussed in light of study limitations including the relatively small sample sizes, particularly for Study 1, deviations in the operationalization of the intervention components from previous research and the lack of a prompt for a goal intention. Future research should focus on ensuring uniformity in the format of the intervention components, test the effects of each component alone and in combination using standardized measures across multiple samples, and systematically explore effects of candidate moderators.
| S-EPMC5110541 | biostudies-literature