PT -期刊文章盟丹尼尔Goldenholz AU -马克·库克盟-罗伯特·莫斯AU -威廉·西奥多TI -安慰剂效应的动力是什么?一个回顾性研究试验(P2.040) DP - 2016年4月05 TA -神经病学PG - P2.040 VI - 86 IP - 1首页6补充4099 - //www.ez-admanager.com/content/86/16_Supplement/P2.040.short 4100 - //www.ez-admanager.com/content/86/16_Supplement/P2.040.full所以Neurology2016 4月05;86 AB -目的:确定癫痫的自然波动的影响“安慰剂效应。“背景:在临床试验中,安慰剂组发作50 [percnt]应答率速率[percnt],归因于回归平均,或心理影响。然而,最近的一项研究发现,自然发作频率波动可能重现“安慰剂反应。”这种效应可以通过评估试验与测试时间逆向流动(好像“基线”排在了最后,不是第一次),有效地消除向均数回归和心理影响。方法:我们回顾性的3项研究进行了分析,比较两个基线两个月的测试期,评估50 [percnt]应答率在传统和逆转时间。来源是(A)的随机试验,经颅磁刺激(TMS), (B)的纵向研究植入记录装置(NeuroVista)和(C) seizuretracker.com,一个大规模的病人报告没收日记数字接口。在(C),患者选择使用基线期:他们需要在4发作,2癫痫每3周以上,没有控制发作期25天。开始时间顺序模拟从日记开始0至24个月。 Results: In (A), the responder rate was 16.6[percnt] and 25[percnt] in traditional and reverse time, N = 7, (all from the placebo arm). In (B), the rates were 20[percnt] and 33[percnt] in traditional and reverse times, N=15. In (C), excluding seizure-freedom, the response rates were 15-31[percnt] in traditional time regardless of start time (N=1116), and 15-28[percnt] in reverse time regardless of start time (N=931). The number of patients varied because of the inclusion criteria. Conclusions: In several clinical trials and patient reported data, natural disease fluctuations produced comparable response rates regardless of temporal direction, suggesting regression to the mean and psychological influences do not play a major role in “placebo effects.”Disclosure: Dr. Goldenholz has nothing to disclose. Dr. Cook has nothing to disclose. Dr. Moss has nothing to disclose. Dr. Theodore has nothing to disclose.Sunday, April 17 2016, 8:30 am-5:30 pm

map