IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0133316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Placebo Responses in Genetically Determined Intellectual Disability: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Aurore Curie
  • Kathy Yang
  • Irving Kirsch
  • Randy L Gollub
  • Vincent des Portes
  • Ted J Kaptchuk
  • Karin B Jensen

Abstract

Background: Genetically determined Intellectual Disability (ID) is an intractable condition that involves severe impairment of mental abilities such as learning, reasoning and predicting the future. As of today, little is known about the placebo response in patients with ID. Objective: To determine if placebo response exists in patients with genetically determined ID. Data sources and Study selection: We searched Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PsycINFO to find all placebo-controlled double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with genetically determined ID, published up to April 2013, focusing on core ID symptoms. Data extraction and synthesis: Two investigators extracted outcome data independently. Main outcomes and measures: Bias-corrected standardized mean difference (Hedge’s g) was computed for each outcome measure, using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. A priori defined patient sub-groups were analyzed using a mixed-effect model. The relationship between pre-defined continuous variable moderators (age, IQ, year of publication and trial duration) and effect size was analyzed using meta-regression Results: Twenty-two placebo-controlled double-blind RCTs met the inclusion criteria (n = 721, mean age = 17.1 years, 62% men, mean trial duration = 35 weeks). There was a significant overall placebo response from pre- to post-treatment in patients with ID (g = 0.468, p = 0.002), both for “subjective outcomes” (a third-person’s evaluation of the patient) (g = 0.563, p = 0.022) and “objective outcomes” (direct evaluation of the patient’s abilities) (g = 0.434, p = 0.036). Individuals with higher IQ had higher response to placebo (p = 0.02) and no placebo response was observed in ID patients with comorbid dementia. A significant effect of age (p = 0.02) was found, indicating higher placebo responses in treatment of younger patients. Conclusions and relevance: Results suggest that patients with genetically determined ID improve in the placebo arm of RCTs. Several mechanisms may contribute to placebo effects in ID, including expectancy, implicit learning and “placebo-by-proxy” induced by clinicians/family members. As the condition is refractory, there is little risk that improvements are explained by spontaneous remission. While new avenues for treatment of genetically determined ID are emerging, our results demonstrate how contextual factors can affect clinical outcomes and emphasize the importance of being vigilant on the role of placebos when testing novel treatments in ID.

Suggested Citation

  • Aurore Curie & Kathy Yang & Irving Kirsch & Randy L Gollub & Vincent des Portes & Ted J Kaptchuk & Karin B Jensen, 2015. "Placebo Responses in Genetically Determined Intellectual Disability: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0133316
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133316
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133316&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0133316?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sylvain Rheims & Michel Cucherat & Alexis Arzimanoglou & Philippe Ryvlin, 2008. "Greater Response to Placebo in Children Than in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Drug-Resistant Partial Epilepsy," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-15, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0133316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.