ArticleSystematic reviews2013
Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- [Methodology of the development of the updated LONTS guidelines for long-term administration of opioids in noncancer pain].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2015Pooled it
- Patterns, trends and determinants of medical opioid utilization in Canada 2005-2020: characterizing an era of intensive rise and fall.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2021Article
- Responses of smoking and nonsmoking cancer patients to drug treatment: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2020Article
- Examining correlations between opioid dispensing and opioid-related hospitalizations in Canada, 2007-2016.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Anxiety sensitivity and opioid misuse and dependence among trauma-exposed adults with chronic pain.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2020Article
- Non-Opioid Neurotransmitter Systems that Contribute to the Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome: A Review of Preclinical and Human Evidence.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2019Review
- Long-term opioid use in non-cancer pain.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2014Article
- Lessons learned from contemporary glioblastoma randomized clinical trials through systematic review and network meta-analysis: part 2 recurrent glioblastoma.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
- Lessons learned from contemporary glioblastoma randomized clinical trials through systematic review and network meta-analysis: part 2 newly diagnosed disease.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOpioids are prescribed frequently and increasingly for the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Current systematic reviews have a number of limitations, leaving uncertainty with regard to the benefits and harms associated with opioid therapy for CNCP. We propose to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence for using opioids in the treatment of CNCP and the risk of associated adverse events. METHODS AND
designEligible trials will include those that randomly allocate patients with CNCP to treatment with any opioid or any non-opioid control group. We will use the guidelines published by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes that we collect and present. We will use the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate confidence in the evidence on an outcome-by-outcome basis. Teams of reviewers will independently and in duplicate assess trial eligibility, abstract data, and assess risk of bias among eligible trials. To ensure interpretability of our results, we will present risk differences and measures of relative effect for all outcomes reported and these will be based on anchor-based minimally important clinical differences, when available. We will conduct a priori defined subgroup analyses consistent with current best practices. DISCUSSION: Our review will evaluate both the effectiveness and the adverse events associated with opioid use for CNCP, evaluate confidence in the evidence using the GRADE approach, and prioritize patient-important outcomes with a focus on functional gains guided by IMMPACT recommendations. Our results will facilitate evidence-based management of patients with CNCP and identify key areas for future research.
trial registrationOur protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42012003023), http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.