Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Positive "framing" as a powerful medication for pain: A meta-analysis of randomized trials
University of Oxford.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0280-7206
University of Oxford.
University of Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9730-2133
University of Southampton.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: European Journal of Integrative Medicine, ISSN 1876-3820, E-ISSN 1876-3839, Vol. 8, 57-59 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction: A growing body of evidence suggests that positive framing–inducing positive expectations about the outcome of treatments can reduce pain symptoms. However there is no pooled estimate of the effect size of positive framing for treating pain. Such an estimate is useful to understand the extent to which positive expectations can enhance usual care.

Methods: We extracted data from a recent systematic review of interventions that modified all "context factors" (including but not limited to) inducing positive expectations) in adults suffering from pain. The systematic review concluded that positive expectations were effective, but did not pool the results so no effect size was provided. Two authors independently extracted data from the studies and conducted the analysis. Our primary outcome was patient self-reported pain.

Results: 10 randomized trials were eligible for meta-analysis. In the trials with continuous outcomes the standardized effect size was −0.39 (95% confidence interval −0.68 to −0.10, p = 0.009, I2 = 79%), suggesting reduced pain on average in groups in which positive expectations were induced. The effect size was similar in magnitude but was not statistically significant when we excluded studies deemed to have a high risk of bias (standard effect size −0.31, 95% CI −0.65 to 0.02, p = 0.07, I2 = 77%).

Conclusion: The effect of inducing positive expectations is comparable to the effects of some pharmacological drugs. However many of the studies had a high risk of bias, and heterogeneity was significant. Future research is warranted including investigating ways to implement this evidence into patient care in an ethical way.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2016. Vol. 8, 57-59 p.
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Research subject
Philosophy; Medical Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-192638DOI: 10.1016/j.eujim.2016.08.136OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-192638DiVA: diva2:971550
Funder
EU, European Research Council, 639276
Note

QC 20160930

Available from: 2016-09-16 Created: 2016-09-16 Last updated: 2016-09-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full texthttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2016.08.136

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Howick, JeremyMebius, Alexander
In the same journal
European Journal of Integrative Medicine
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 78 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf