Expectancy Effects, Failure of Blinding Integrity, and Placebo Response in Trials of Treatments for Psychiatric Disorders: A Narrative Review.
Nathan T M Huneke, Guilherme Fusetto Veronesi, Matthew Garner, David S Baldwin, Samuele Cortese
JAMA Psychiatry May 1, 2025 DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0085 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Narrative review Randomized Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Citations | 50 |
| Key findings | Expectancy effects are a significant confound in psychiatric RCTs, and controlling for them is essential for accurate interpretation of results. |
Abstract
Expectancy effects are significant confounding factors in psychiatric randomized clinical trials (RCTs), potentially affecting the interpretation of study results. This narrative review is the first, to our knowledge, to explore the relationship between expectancy effects, compromised blinding integrity, and the effects of active treatment/placebo in psychiatric RCTs. Additionally, we present statistical and experimental approaches that may help mitigate the confounding impact of expectancy effects. The review concludes with recommendations to enhance the reliability of RCTs in psychiatry. The placebo response comprises both specific and nonspecific elements, with expectation being a key specific component. Evidence from experimental and clinical studies suggests that expectancy can influence treatment responses in RCTs. Blinding integrity may be compromised by perceived treatment efficacy and adverse effects, introducing bias into outcome assessments. Treatment expectations can lead to unblinding during RCTs, and meta-analytic data from studies in the fields of psychedelics and anxiety disorders indicate that this can influence effect sizes. Therefore, controlling for expectancy effects is essential when interpreting RCT results. Novel statistical methods, though still in need of further validation, offer strategies to address this issue. Another approach may involve experimental medicine models, which aim to develop objective improvement markers (readouts) less affected by expectancy effects. Expectancy effects represent a significant confound in psychiatric RCTs. We recommend collecting data on treatment expectations alongside monitoring blinding integrity to more accurately interpret study results. Additionally, developing objective readouts that are less confounded by expectancy effects offers another promising avenue for mitigating these confounding influences in psychiatric RCTs.
Citations in the library
Cited by 15
- Psilocybin in alcohol use disorder and comorbid depressive symptoms: Results from a feasibility randomized clinical trial Addiction July 24, 2025
- Psychedelic-assisted therapy as a complex intervention: implications for clinical trial design Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology September 1, 2025
- Low-Dose Buprenorphine Following Ketamine Treatment for Suicidal Ideation in Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. American Journal of Psychiatry June 1, 2026
- Efficacy of intranasal esketamine versus rTMS for treatment-resistant depression: analysis of individual participant data from two clinical trials. EClinicalMedicine December 1, 2025
- Psilocybin in the Treatment of Cocaine Use Disorder JAMA Network Open May 7, 2026
and 10 more in the library
Cites 8
- Blinding and expectancy confounds in psychedelic randomized controlled trials Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology May 26, 2021
- Great Expectations: recommendations for improving the methodological rigor of psychedelic clinical trials Psychopharmacology April 1, 2022
- Randomized trial of ketamine masked by surgical anesthesia in patients with depression Nature Mental Health October 19, 2023
- Therapeutic mechanisms of psychedelics and entactogens. Neuropsychopharmacology July 24, 2023
- Expectancy Effects in Psychedelic Trials. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging May 1, 2024
and 3 more in the library