The investigation of nocebo effects is evolving and a few literature reviews have emerged, however, so far without quantifying such effects. This meta-analysis investigated nocebo effects in pain. We searched the databases PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register with the term “nocebo”. Only studies that investigated nocebo effects as the effects that follow the administration of an inert treatment along with verbal suggestions of symptom worsening and that included a no-treatment control condition were eligible. Ten studies fulfilled the selection criteria. The effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d and Hedges’ g. The overall magnitude of the nocebo effect was moderate to large (lowest g = 0.62 (0.24-1.01) and highest g = 1.03 (0.63-1.43)) and highly variable (range of g = −0.43-4.05). The magnitudes and range of effect sizes was similar to those of placebo effects (d = 0.81) in mechanistic studies. In studies where nocebo effects were induced by a combination of verbal suggestions and conditioning, the effect size was larger (lowest g = 0.76 (0.39-1.14) and highest g = 1.17 (0.52-1.81)) than in studies where nocebo effects were induced by verbal suggestions alone (lowest g = 0.64 (−0.25-1.53) and highest g = 0.87 (0.40-1.34)). These findings are similar to those in the placebo literature. Since the magnitude of the nocebo effect is variable and sometimes large, this meta-analysis demonstrates the importance of minimizing nocebo effects in clinical practice.

Recent meta-analyses find various magnitudes of placebo analgesia effects in placebo mechanism trials versus placebo control trials, which have led to debate. To further investigate the magnitude of placebo analgesia in placebo mechanism trials the databases "PubMed", "PsycINFO" and "Web of Science" (2002-2007) were searched with the term "placebo analgesia". Twenty-one articles including 24 studies fulfilled the selection criteria (concerning: mechanisms, control, placebo treatment, randomization and pain measures). The validity of studies was assessed by the authors and effect sizes were calculated via difference scores. The magnitude of placebo analgesia in placebo mechanism studies was large (d=1.00) and about five times larger than placebo analgesia effects in placebo control studies (d=0.15-0.27). Differences in magnitude between the two types of studies appear to result from different types of suggestions given for pain relief. The magnitude of placebo effects was larger in studies that used long-term pain stimuli >20s (d=0.96) as opposed to short-term stimuli (d=0.81) and the largest placebo effects were found in studies wherein hyperalgesia was present (d=1.88). These results replicate our previous finding that placebo analgesic effects are higher in mechanism studies than in placebo control studies. However, since magnitudes of placebo analgesic effects are highly variable it may be valuable to investigate the factors and mechanisms that contribute to this variability as well as differences in magnitudes across types of studies.