The Role of Attention in Placebo and Nocebo Effects.

Attention Direct assessment Direct manipulation Expectation Placebo/nocebo effects

Journal

Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine
ISSN: 1532-4796
Titre abrégé: Ann Behav Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8510246

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 Jul 2024
Historique:
medline: 17 7 2024
pubmed: 17 7 2024
entrez: 16 7 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Although some existing models propose that attention may be crucially implicated in placebo/nocebo effects, empirical research on this aspect remains limited and scattered. This systematic review aims to provide an inclusive overview of studies that have either directly manipulated or assessed attention within the context of placebo and nocebo procedures so to gain a synthetized picture of the role of this variable in placebo/nocebo effects. Importantly, only studies in which attention represented a mechanism or mediator of the placebo/nocebo response, and not a primary outcome, were included. A systematic search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Embase, to identify peer-reviewed studies. These studies were subjected to methodological evaluation and eligibility criteria for inclusion. We identified and classified 12 studies into three categories based on their focus: (i) those that directly assessed attention, (ii) those that directly manipulated participants' attention, and (iii) those that combined both a direct manipulation and assessment of attention. In all selected studies attention acted as a mechanism or mediator of the placebo/nocebo response, and was not considered a primary outcome of the placebo/nocebo manipulation. The synthesis of the included studies reveals that the role of attention in placebo and nocebo effects is still a topic of debate, marked by variations in how attention is conceptualized and measured. Results suggest that attention has significant clinical implications, particularly in optimizing therapeutic efficacy by directing patients' focus toward signs of healing and away from indicators of illness or distress. To advance our understanding, future research should explore these attentional mechanisms, in conjunction with neurophysiological correlates. To date, empirical research on the role of attention in placebo/nocebo effects remains scarce and inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review is to offer an overview of studies that have either directly manipulated or assessed attention as a mechanism or mediator of placebo/nocebo responses. Peer-review studies were subjected to methodological evaluation and eligibility criteria, and 12 studies were selected and classified into 3 categories based on their focus: (i) those that directly assessed attention, (ii) those that directly manipulated participants’ attention, and (iii) those that combined both a direct manipulation and assessment of attention. The synthesis of the included studies points to the nuanced methodological approaches to the study of the role of attention in placebo and nocebo effects, marked by variations in how this variable is conceptualized and measured. Overall, results support the idea that placebo/nocebo effects are not always a direct byproduct of expectations, with attention acting as an important factor to consider when exploring this relationship. Particularly, attention plays an important role in optimizing therapeutic efficacy by directing patients’ focus toward signs of healing and away from indicators of illness or distress.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Although some existing models propose that attention may be crucially implicated in placebo/nocebo effects, empirical research on this aspect remains limited and scattered.
PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to provide an inclusive overview of studies that have either directly manipulated or assessed attention within the context of placebo and nocebo procedures so to gain a synthetized picture of the role of this variable in placebo/nocebo effects. Importantly, only studies in which attention represented a mechanism or mediator of the placebo/nocebo response, and not a primary outcome, were included.
METHODS METHODS
A systematic search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Embase, to identify peer-reviewed studies. These studies were subjected to methodological evaluation and eligibility criteria for inclusion.
RESULTS RESULTS
We identified and classified 12 studies into three categories based on their focus: (i) those that directly assessed attention, (ii) those that directly manipulated participants' attention, and (iii) those that combined both a direct manipulation and assessment of attention. In all selected studies attention acted as a mechanism or mediator of the placebo/nocebo response, and was not considered a primary outcome of the placebo/nocebo manipulation.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The synthesis of the included studies reveals that the role of attention in placebo and nocebo effects is still a topic of debate, marked by variations in how attention is conceptualized and measured. Results suggest that attention has significant clinical implications, particularly in optimizing therapeutic efficacy by directing patients' focus toward signs of healing and away from indicators of illness or distress. To advance our understanding, future research should explore these attentional mechanisms, in conjunction with neurophysiological correlates.
To date, empirical research on the role of attention in placebo/nocebo effects remains scarce and inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review is to offer an overview of studies that have either directly manipulated or assessed attention as a mechanism or mediator of placebo/nocebo responses. Peer-review studies were subjected to methodological evaluation and eligibility criteria, and 12 studies were selected and classified into 3 categories based on their focus: (i) those that directly assessed attention, (ii) those that directly manipulated participants’ attention, and (iii) those that combined both a direct manipulation and assessment of attention. The synthesis of the included studies points to the nuanced methodological approaches to the study of the role of attention in placebo and nocebo effects, marked by variations in how this variable is conceptualized and measured. Overall, results support the idea that placebo/nocebo effects are not always a direct byproduct of expectations, with attention acting as an important factor to consider when exploring this relationship. Particularly, attention plays an important role in optimizing therapeutic efficacy by directing patients’ focus toward signs of healing and away from indicators of illness or distress.

Autres résumés

Type: plain-language-summary (eng)
To date, empirical research on the role of attention in placebo/nocebo effects remains scarce and inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review is to offer an overview of studies that have either directly manipulated or assessed attention as a mechanism or mediator of placebo/nocebo responses. Peer-review studies were subjected to methodological evaluation and eligibility criteria, and 12 studies were selected and classified into 3 categories based on their focus: (i) those that directly assessed attention, (ii) those that directly manipulated participants’ attention, and (iii) those that combined both a direct manipulation and assessment of attention. The synthesis of the included studies points to the nuanced methodological approaches to the study of the role of attention in placebo and nocebo effects, marked by variations in how this variable is conceptualized and measured. Overall, results support the idea that placebo/nocebo effects are not always a direct byproduct of expectations, with attention acting as an important factor to consider when exploring this relationship. Particularly, attention plays an important role in optimizing therapeutic efficacy by directing patients’ focus toward signs of healing and away from indicators of illness or distress.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39013786
pii: 7715048
doi: 10.1093/abm/kaae038
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : Italian Ministry of Research
ID : 2022T42HSZ

Informations de copyright

© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Diletta Barbiani (D)

Department of Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.

Eleonora M Camerone (EM)

Department of Psychology, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.

Francesca Grosso (F)

Department of Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
IRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy.

Andrew L Geers (AL)

Department of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.

Francesco Pagnini (F)

Department of Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.

Classifications MeSH