Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Research

Sham device v inert pill: randomised controlled trial of two placebo treatments

BMJ 2006; 332 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38726.603310.55 (Published 16 February 2006) Cite this as: BMJ 2006;332:391

Rapid Response:

Case unproven?

Congratulations on an interesting study. However, is it not rather
unusual for placebo-related phenomena to be delayed by some weeks, as
appears to be the case only with the sham acupuncture?

This leads to some questions. Were the patients somehow cued that
the "business" part of the trial was being entered at the two week mark?

That knowledge may have stimulated the more favourable reporting for
the more intense, mysterious, and hands-on form of care, regardless of
any true "effect" of the placebo.

Also, was the extension of the trial only decided upon when the
intended two week study failed to show the expected results?

Competing interests:
None declared

Competing interests: No competing interests

07 February 2006
Peter Moran
Retired surgeon
Ipswich Queensland