FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 345:1276-1279 October 25, 2001 Number 17 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited PubMed Citation

To the Editor: On the basis of their meta-analysis, Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche (May 24 issue)¹ doubt the power of the placebo. Such meta-analyses are inevitably restricted by the studies chosen and the sensitivity of their measures. For example, binary outcomes have less power to detect effects generally than do continuous outcomes, and both power and effect size for binary outcomes are very sensitive to base rates. The technique of meta-analysis was designed for trials addressing similar questions.^2,3 This was not at all the case with the studies analyzed by Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche. The populations varied widely, influenced by the disorders . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Spiegel, D., Harrington, A. (2008). What is the placebo worth?. BMJ 336: 967-968 [Full Text]  
• Spiegel, D. (2007). The Mind Prepared: Hypnosis in Surgery. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 99: 1280-1281 [Full Text]  
• Barfod, T. S (2005). Placebos in medicine: Placebo use is well known, placebo effect is not. BMJ 330: 45-45 [Full Text]  
• Spiegel, D. (2004). Placebos in practice. BMJ 329: 927-928 [Full Text]  
• Temple, R. J. (2003). Implications of Effects in Placebo Groups. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 2-3 [Full Text]  
• Moerman, D. E., Jonas, W. B. (2002). Deconstructing the Placebo Effect and Finding the Meaning Response. ANN INTERN MED 136: 471-476 [Abstract] [Full Text]