Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow diagram of patient’s enrollment.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Demographic and clinical characteristics for different groups.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Results of the ANOVA (factors time: Pre/post treatment, placebo pills: Yes/no, expectancy briefing: Detailed information on placebos / no detailed information; depending variables: Composite symptom scores, physical and mental sum scores of the SF-36) significant results in bold, no other significant results were found).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Changes of allergic symptoms for open-label placebo and control group (mean and standard error).

Patients indicated their response on a seven-point scale ranging from ‘never’ (1) to ‘always’ (7) (composite score of all symptoms). Results demonstrate significantly stronger improvement for the open-label placebo group relative to the control group. * p = 0.02.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Data of the allergic diary demonstrate improvement of the open-label placebo group over time.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 3.

Treatment outcomes (pre, post, and change scores).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Changes of allergic symptoms for open-label placebo and control group for single symptom groups (mean and standard error).

Results show significant improvements for the open-label placebo group but not for the control group. * p < 0.05, (*) p = 0.06.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Change of mental or emotional quality of life (mental sum score of the SF-36) when receiving detailed information on placebos (raising positive expectancies) compared with no detailed information about the power of placebos.

Results revealed stronger improvement of mental or emotional quality of life when being told that placebos are powerful (irrespective of receiving open-label placebos).

More »

Fig 5 Expand