↓ Skip to main content

Identifying placebo responders and predictors of response in osteoarthritis: a protocol for individual patient data meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Identifying placebo responders and predictors of response in osteoarthritis: a protocol for individual patient data meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0362-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Fu, Monica S. M. Persson, Archan Bhattacharya, Siew-Li Goh, Joanne Stocks, Marienke van Middelkoop, Sita M. A. Bierma-Zeinstra, David Walsh, Michael Doherty, Weiya Zhang

Abstract

The management of osteoarthritis (OA) is unsatisfactory, as most treatments are not clinically effective over placebo and most drugs have considerable side effects. On average, 75 % of the analgesic effect from OA treatments in clinical trials can be attributed to a placebo response, and this response varies greatly from patient to patient. This individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis aims to identify placebo responders and the potential determinants of the placebo response in OA. This study is undertaken in conjunction with the OA Trial Bank, an ongoing international consortium aiming to collect IPD from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for all treatments of OA. RCTs for each treatment of OA have been systematically searched for, and authors of the relevant trials have been contacted to request the IPD. We will use the IPD of placebo-controlled RCTs held by the OA Trial Bank for this project. The IPD in placebo groups will be used to investigate the placebo response according to the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) threshold (e.g. 20 % pain reduction). Responders to placebo will be compared with non-responders to identify predictors of response. The quality of the trials will be assessed and potential determinants will be examined using multilevel logistic regression analyses. This study explores the varying magnitude of the placebo response and the proportion of participants that experience a clinically important placebo effect in OA RCTs. Potential determinants of the placebo response will also be investigated. These determinants may be useful for future studies as it may allow participants to be stratified into groups based on their likely response to placebo. The results of this study may also be useful for pharmaceutical companies, who could improve the design of their studies in order to separate the specific treatment from the non-specific contextual (i.e. placebo) effects. PROSPERO CRD42016033212.

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 %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Professor 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 21 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 24 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,492,264
of 24,552,012 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,601
of 2,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,926
of 319,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#40
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,552,012 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 319,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.