↓ Skip to main content

To See or NOsee: The Debate on the Nocebo Effect and Optimizing the Use of Biosimilars

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Therapy, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
To See or NOsee: The Debate on the Nocebo Effect and Optimizing the Use of Biosimilars
Published in
Advances in Therapy, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12325-018-0719-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mourad F. Rezk, Burkhard Pieper

Abstract

In addition to the general clinical benefit offered, biosimilars may not only generate savings for healthcare budgets but also improve patient access to biologic products. Since the first biosimilar was approved in Europe in 2006, a further 36 different biosimilar drugs have been approved for several indications. Despite the wealth of experience gained and the reported data supporting the use of biosimilars, both in naïve and biologic-experienced patients, some healthcare professionals continue to express doubt regarding the rigorous approval process for biosimilars and uncertainty with how to incorporate them into daily clinical practice. These opinions can be transferred to patients through poor or lack of communication, meaning that patients may lack confidence in treatment quality and, as a result, be susceptible to the nocebo effect. At the 2017 American College of Rheumatology/Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals annual meeting, during a debate the question was asked as to whether the nocebo effect was in fact being used to describe "any result you don't agree with". Here, we detail that the nocebo effect has been demonstrated in a number of clinical trials, and that this effect may negatively affect acceptance in patients switching from an originator product to a biosimilar. Awareness of the potential for the nocebo effect and adoption of enhanced communication techniques may be useful in mitigating the nocebo effect. Effective healthcare professional-patient dialogue is key in transferring confidence to the patient, and has been shown to reduce nocebo effects in patients when switching from an originator to a biosimilar. Biogen International GmbH.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 16%
Student > Master 9 15%
Other 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 21 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,535,385
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Therapy
#1,335
of 2,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,803
of 329,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Therapy
#21
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,385 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.