Openly given placebos favored self-reports, while physical function tests showed no detected benefit
In chronic back or knee pain trials, openly administered placebos favored patients' reports of pain and function. Physical function tests showed no detected benefit, and clinical value remains uncertain.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
For people with chronic back or knee pain, openly administered placebos showed possible benefits in self-reported pain and physical function compared with usual care or no treatment. Physical function tests showed no detected benefit. Confidence in the self-reported findings was low, and the review did not establish whether these differences had meaningful clinical value.
All trials had high risk of bias for self-reported outcomes because participants knew their intervention. Most follow-up was short, and the review judged the clinical value of open-label placebo unresolved.
What openly administered means
An open-label placebo is given with participants aware that it is a placebo. The review considered it both alone and alongside other care, separating patients' own reports from performance on physical function tests.
Why the outcome distinction matters
Self-reported pain and function favored placebo, but evidence for those results was rated low. Evidence for the physical test findings was rated moderate. This difference leaves uncertainty about how reported improvement relates to measurable physical performance.
The original publication
A systematic review and meta analysis of open label placebo effects in chronic musculoskeletal pain.
Borg F, Gedin F, Franzén E et al.
Sci Rep · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 40617928
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.