↓ Skip to main content

Minimal acupuncture is not a valid placebo control in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture: a physiologist's perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Medicine, January 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
175 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Minimal acupuncture is not a valid placebo control in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture: a physiologist's perspective
Published in
Chinese Medicine, January 2009
DOI 10.1186/1749-8546-4-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iréne Lund, Jan Näslund, Thomas Lundeberg

Abstract

Placebo-control of acupuncture is used to evaluate and distinguish between the specific effects and the non-specific ones. During 'true' acupuncture treatment in general, the needles are inserted into acupoints and stimulated until deqi is evoked. In contrast, during placebo acupuncture, the needles are inserted into non-acupoints and/or superficially (so-called minimal acupuncture). A sham acupuncture needle with a blunt tip may be used in placebo acupuncture. Both minimal acupuncture and the placebo acupuncture with the sham acupuncture needle touching the skin would evoke activity in cutaneous afferent nerves. This afferent nerve activity has pronounced effects on the functional connectivity in the brain resulting in a 'limbic touch response'. Clinical studies showed that both acupuncture and minimal acupuncture procedures induced significant alleviation of migraine and that both procedures were equally effective. In other conditions such as low back pain and knee osteoarthritis, acupuncture was found to be more potent than minimal acupuncture and conventional non-acupuncture treatment. It is probable that the responses to 'true' acupuncture and minimal acupuncture are dependent on the aetiology of the pain. Furthermore, patients and healthy individuals may have different responses. In this paper, we argue that minimal acupuncture is not valid as an inert placebo-control despite its conceptual brilliance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Korea, Democratic People's Republic of 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 85 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Bachelor 15 16%
Other 12 13%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Other 21 23%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 11 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Medicine
#221
of 660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,257
of 186,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Medicine
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 186,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.