ReviewInflammopharmacology2014
Palmitoylethanolamide: problems regarding micronization, ultra-micronization and additives.
Review in Inflammopharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Palmitoylethanolamide in the Treatment of Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2023Pooled it
- A Decades-Long Journey of Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) for Chronic Neuropathic Pain Management: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Pain and therapy · 2025Review
- Next-Generation Probiotics for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Comment on "short-term efficacy of ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide in peripheral neuropathic pain".Pain research and treatment · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It can be established that at least two of the writers of the article published in 'Inflammopharmacology', title: 'Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), a naturally occurring disease-modifying agent in neuropathic pain' have a direct connection to the companies Epitech and Innovet. These companies produce micronized and ultra-micronized PEA. Therefore it is of eminent importance to determine whether the statements in this paper have also taken into consideration the European guidelines for Good Clinical Practice and the codes of good scientific practices. This is very questionable. A minimum condition in clinical studies for proving the claim that PEA in its micronized and ultra-micronized formulations works better than in its pure form or in other formulations is that a comparison be made between: PEA in pure form or in other formulations, on the one hand; PEA in the micronized and ultra-micronized formulations, on the other hand. This minimum condition is not complied with. Based on additional studies discussed in this commentary and in view of the effects of ultra-micronization on the parameters discussed, as well as the potential side-effects of additives such as excipients and herbal extracts added to the products cited in the article, the preference should be for the time being to treat patients with pure PEA without any of these additives.
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.