Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28186946›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Gabapentinoids for chronic low back pain: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Harsha Shanthanna, Ian Gilron, Lehana Thabane, Philip J Devereaux, Mohit Bhandari, Rizq AlAmri, Manikandan Rajarathinam, Sriganesh Kamath

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
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

8 authors.

Harsha ShanthannaDepartment of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Ian GilronDepartment of Anesthesiology and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Lehana ThabaneDepartment of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Philip J DevereauxDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Mohit BhandariDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Rizq AlAmriDepartment of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Manikandan RajarathinamDepartment of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Sriganesh KamathDepartment of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionChronic low back pain (CLBP) is a common condition and causes significant pain, distress and disability across the world. It is multifactorial in aetiology and is challenging to manage. Although the underlying mechanism of pain is predominantly non-specific, many argue that there is a substantial neuropathic pain element. Neuropathic pain is more severe, with significant disability. Gabapentinoids, including gabapentin and pregabalin, have proven efficacy in some neuropathic pain conditions. Despite no clear evidence, a substantial population of patients with CLBP are treated with gabapentinoids.

objectivesWe aim to assess whether the use of gabapentinoids is effective and safe in the treatment of predominant CLBP, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials (RCTs). METHODOLOGY: We will search the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane for RCTs published in English language and have used gabapentinoids for the treatment of CLBP. Study selection and data extraction will be performed independently by paired reviewers using structured electronic forms, piloted between pairs of reviewers. The review outcomes will be guided by Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials guidelines, with pain relief as the primary outcome. We propose to carry out meta-analysis if there are three or more studies in a particular outcome domain, using a random effects model. Pooled outcomes will be reported as weighted mean differences or standardised mean differences and risk ratios with their corresponding 95% CIs, for continuous outcomes and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Rating of quality of evidence will be reported using GRADE summary of findings table. DISCUSSION: The proposed systematic review will be able to provide valuable evidence to help decision-making in the use of gabapentinoids for the treatment of CLBP. This will help advance patient care and potentially highlight limitations in existing evidence to direct future research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Being a systematic review, this study would not necessitate ethical review and approval. We plan to report and publish our study findings in a high impact medical journal, with online access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016034040.

Indexed as

AminesChronic PainCyclohexanecarboxylic AcidsGabapentingamma-Aminobutyric AcidHumansLow Back PainMeta-Analysis as TopicNeuralgiaPain ManagementPain MeasurementPregabalinRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAminesCyclohexanecarboxylic AcidsGabapentingamma-Aminobutyric AcidPregabalin

Identifiers

PMID28186946
PMCPMC5128988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.