Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12525266›Full record

ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2003

Opioids: a review.

Eric Chevlen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Clinical use of opioids for cancer pain.Current pain and headache reports · 2007
    Review
  11. Frontiers in functional dyspepsia.Current gastroenterology reports · 2005
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Advances in opioid pharmacology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2005
    Review
  14. Recent advances in clinical use of opioids.Current pain and headache reports · 2004
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eric ChevlenCancer Care Center, St. Elizabeth Hospital, 1044 Belmont Avenue, Youngstown, OH 44501, USA. echevlen@neoucom.edu
St. Elizabeth Hospital in Enumclaw · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent discoveries in opioid pharmacology help explain the enormous variability in clinical responses to these powerful analgesics. Although there is only one m opioid receptor gene, splice variants of that gene's expression result in a panoply of different functioning receptors. Other sources of variable response include polymorphisms in the m opioid receptor regulatory region, and pharmacokinetic differences because of cytochrome P-450 mono-oxygenase heterogeneity. Analgesic tolerance is likely the key phenomenon limiting the benefit of opioids. A plethora of intracellular pathways affects this. Among them are the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor, protein kinase C gamma activity, nitric oxide synthase, and GM1 ganglioside content of the neuronal membrane. Clinical studies undercut the routine use of meperidine in most settings. Other studies have shown better ways to diminish opioid side effects.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidAnimalsClinical Trials as TopicDrug ToleranceHumansPainReceptors, OpioidReceptors, Opioid, muTrans-ActivatorsAnalgesics, OpioidOprm1 protein, ratReceptors, OpioidReceptors, Opioid, muTrans-Activators

Identifiers

PMID12525266
OpenAlexW2014643757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.