SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2016
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of neuropathic pain: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 6 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
60 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Systematic review of global clinical practice guidelines for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Medical Cannabis for Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review of Health Care Recommendations.Pain research & management · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnosis and treatment for hyperuricemia and gout: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Migrant Healthcare Guidelines: A Systematic Quality Assessment.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2019Pooled it
- Topical Fisionerv® is effective in treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2019Trial
- Dextromethorphan and memantine after ketamine analgesia: a randomized control trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Trial
- Review
- Topical analgesics for neuropathic pain: an evidence-informed guide for the practicing clinician.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Review
- A comparative analysis of clinical quality and readability of neuropathic pain patient information leaflets: Türkiye versus the United States.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Pain, quality of life, and function in chronic intractable leg pain were substantially improved with 10kHz spinal cord stimulation in a multicentre European study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Observational
- Ultrasound-Guided Interventions for Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Pictorial Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Psychotropic Medications for Non-Psychiatric Conditions: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- A Nursing Home Clinician Survey to Explain Gabapentinoid Increases.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Magnetic Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Treatment of Neuropathic Pain; One Year Follow Up of Long-Term Outcomes.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- The dual role of TRPV1 in peripheral neuropathic pain: pain switches caused by its sensitization or desensitization.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2024Review
- Combination Drug Therapy for the Management of Chronic Neuropathic Pain.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Prescription Opioid Initiation for Neuropathy, Headache, and Low Back Pain: A US Population-based Medicare Study.The journal of pain · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe management of neuropathic pain (NP) is challenging despite it being the recent focus of extensive research. A number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of NP have been published worldwide over the past 2 decades. This study aimed to assess the quality of these CPGs.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of published CPGs for the management of NP. Three reviewers independently assessed the quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) instrument, and recommendations of CPGs were also appraised.
resultsA total of 16 CPGs were included. Thirteen CPGs were developed using an evidence-based approach, and the remaining CPGs were produced by consensus panels. None of CPGs obtained a score greater than 50% in all six AGREE II instrument domains mainly owing to poor performance in the "Applicability" domain. The highest score of the CPGs was achieved in "Clarity and Presentation" domain, followed by "Scope and Purpose" and "Editorial Independence" domains, and the lowest scores were found the in "Applicability" domain. The majority of the CPG recommendations on the management of patients with NP were relatively consistent, especially regarding the recommendation of stepwise treatment with medication.
conclusionsGreater efforts are needed not only to improve the quality of development and presentation of the CPGs, but also to provide more efficacy evidence for the management of patients with NP.
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.