3 ms·
Your concern disappears if your method is to compare, on one hand, difference between treatment and nothing, and on the other hand, difference between placebo a
by henearkr 7y ago
Your concern disappears if your method is to compare, on one hand, difference between treatment and nothing, and on the other hand, difference between placebo and nothing. To only compare treatment and placebo directly is of course a methodological error.
PS: By the way, I'd advocate to scrutinize the biological bases of the placebo effect, in order to 1/ use it instead of trying to ignore it 2/ predict accurately its effect and thus lighten a lot the burden of test plans (ideally the tests could not need anymore to be double blind -- would save lots of time and money)
- heisenzombie 7y agomy understanding (see references in linked page) is that when one does what you said and compare placebo to “nothing”, almost the entire effect goes away.
- fooblat 7y agoHow would you propose a blinded study will work to compare between a Placebo treatment and no treatment?
- heisenzombie 7y agoOne way is to use waiting list controls.
- henearkr 7y agoTo compare placebo vs nothing (i.e. no placebo), you don't need the double-blind requirement. Because the group receiving nothing is not receiving the placebo, and thus does not (and should not) benefit from any illusion of having being treated.
- henearkr 7y agoIf we can verify that (I really hope so) it would be great news. Because the tests would be much simpler, and maybe costs and duration would become 1/10 of what they are today or even much less. The double-blind requirements are really a pain.