↓ Skip to main content

The Effects of Positive or Neutral Communication during Acupuncture for Relaxing Effects: A Sham-Controlled Randomized Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effects of Positive or Neutral Communication during Acupuncture for Relaxing Effects: A Sham-Controlled Randomized Trial
Published in
Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), February 2016
DOI 10.1155/2016/3925878
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annelie Rosén, Mats Lekander, Karin Jensen, Lisbeth Sachs, Predrag Petrovic, Martin Ingvar, Anna Enblom

Abstract

Introduction. The link between patient-clinician communication and its effect on clinical outcomes is an important clinical issue that is yet to be elucidated. Objective. Investigating if communication type (positive or neutral) about the expected treatment outcome affected (i) participants' expectations and (ii) short-term relaxation effects in response to genuine or sham acupuncture and investigating if expectations were related to outcome. Methods. Healthy volunteers (n = 243, mean age of 42) were randomized to one treatment with genuine or sham acupuncture. Within groups, participants were randomized to positive or neutral communication, regarding expected treatment effects. Visual Analogue Scales (0-100 millimeters) were used to measure treatment expectations and relaxation, directly before and after treatment. Results. Participants in the positive communication group reported higher treatment expectancy, compared to the neutral communication group (md 12 versus 6 mm, p = 0.002). There was no difference in relaxation effects between acupuncture groups or between communication groups. Participants with high baseline expectancy perceived greater improvement in relaxation, compared to participants with low baseline levels (md 27 versus 15 mm, p = 0.022). Conclusion. Our data highlights the importance of expectations for treatment outcome and demonstrates that expectations can be effectively manipulated using a standardized protocol that in future research may be implemented in clinical trials.

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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 25%
Student > Master 5 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Psychology 2 8%
Unknown 8 33%
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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#19,962,154
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#4,647
of 9,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,691
of 410,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#82
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 410,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.