Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20157745›Full record

Trial reportJournal of bone and mineral metabolism2010

Analgesic effect of raloxifene on back and knee pain in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and/or osteoarthritis.

Takuo Fujita, Yoshio Fujii, Hiromi Munezane, Mutsumi Ohue, Yasuyuki Takagi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of bone and mineral metabolism, 2010. 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
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Understanding osteoporotic pain and its pharmacological treatment.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Individualizing osteoporosis therapy.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2012
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Takuo FujitaKatsuragi Hospital, 250 Makamicho, Kishiwada, Osaka 596-0842, Japan. fujita@katsuragi-hosp.or.jp
Yoshio Fujii
Hiromi Munezane
Mutsumi Ohue
Yasuyuki Takagi
Protein Research Foundation · JPShirasagi Hospital · JPHyogo Chuo National Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess the effect of raloxifene on bone and joint pain, 24 postmenopausal women with back or knee pain or both were randomly divided into two groups, based on the chronological sequence of consultation, to be treated with 60 mg raloxifene and 1 microg alfacalcidol (RA)/day (group RA) or 1 microg alfacalcidol alone (A)/day (group A), respectively, for 6 months. Pain following knee loading (KL) by standing up from a chair and bending the knee by squatting, knee and spine loading (KSL) by walking horizontally and ascending and descending stairs, and spine loading (SL) by lying down supine on a bed and leaving the bed to stand was evaluated by electroalgometry (EAM), based on measurement of the fall of skin impedance, and a visual rating scale (VRS), recording subjective pain on a scale of 0-100 between no pain and unbearable pain. The two groups showed no significant difference as to age, indices of mineral metabolism, back and knee pain, and bone status. RA gave a significantly greater analgesic effect than A by both EAM (P = 0.0158) and VRS (P = 0.0268) on overall comparison of the mean response to all modalities of exercise loading. Paired comparison between pretreatment and posttreatment indicated a significant effect of RA by both EAM (P = 0.0045) and VRS (P = 0.0017), but not that of A. The analgesic effect was more clearly noted on combined knee-spine loading (KSL) and spine loading (SL) than simple knee loading (KL). Monthly comparison of the analgesic effect indicated a significantly better analgesic effect in the fifth month by VRS. RA effect greater than A was more evident by EAM than VRS and during months 3-6 than during 1-2 months, suggesting a slowly progressive effect of RA. Pain evaluation by EAM and VRS mostly gave parallel results, except for a few occasions such as knee loading and spine loading by sitting up and leaving a bed, when EAM detected a positive effect but VRS failed to do so. RA appeared to be more effective on bone and joint pain than A in postmenopausal women according to both EAM and VRS measurements.

Indexed as

AgedArthralgiaBack PainBone Density Conservation AgentsFemaleHumansKnee JointMiddle AgedOsteoarthritisOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalRaloxifene HydrochlorideBone Density Conservation AgentsRaloxifene Hydrochloride

Identifiers

PMID20157745
OpenAlexW2016328111

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.