↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

A systematic review of sex differences in the placebo and the nocebo effect

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
A systematic review of sex differences in the placebo and the nocebo effect
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s134745
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara M Vambheim, Magne Arve Flaten, Sara Vambheim

Abstract

The present review investigated whether there are systematic sex differences in the placebo and the nocebo effect. A literature search was conducted in multiple electronic databases. Studies were included if the study compared a group or condition where a placebo was administered to a natural history group or similar cohort. Eighteen studies were identified - 12 on placebo effects and 6 on nocebo effects. Chi-square tests revealed that 1) males responded more strongly to placebo treatment, and females responded more strongly to nocebo treatment, and 2) males responded with larger placebo effects induced by verbal information, and females responded with larger nocebo effects induced by conditioning procedures. This review indicates that there are sex differences in the placebo and nocebo effects, probably caused by sex differences in stress, anxiety, and the endogenous opioid system.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 24%
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 24%
Neuroscience 12 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 13 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,454,701
of 13,566,763 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#168
of 1,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,779
of 268,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#11
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,566,763 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,023 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,649 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.