http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0948-0149
Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeAdditional Comment about Design
Posted by smckelvie on 22 Jul 2018 at 18:05 GMT
I should add that the authors acknowledge that absence of a placebo group, but defend their design on the grounds that its purpose was to identify a difference from the control group, not to account for it. They admit that their results could be a placebo effect. However, I think it is important to establish whether the result is a placebo effect and that the journal should have asked for a replication with the proper placebo condition before the paper was published.
RE: Additional Comment about Design
etarleton replied to smckelvie on 23 Jul 2018 at 12:07 GMT
Quite strong statements about a small study that provides evidence that a placebo-controlled trial is a valid next step. These types of studies are very difficult to fund. This study provides valuable data on tolerability, dosing, and exposure time which is needed to successfully obtain funding for a larger, multi-center, placebo-controlled trial.