ArticleBMJ open2018
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antiepileptic drugs for classical trigeminal neuralgia: a Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral pharmacological treatments for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Trigeminal Neuralgia: Current Approaches and Emerging Interventions.Journal of pain research · 2021Review
- A simple mechanistic terminology of psychoactive drugs: a proposal.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2020Review
- Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Ozone Injection Around Gasserian Ganglion for the Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Journal of pain research · 2020Article
- Magnetic resonance spectroscopy across chronic pain disorders: a systematic review protocol synthesising anatomical and metabolite findings in chronic pain patients.Systematic reviews · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTrigeminal neuralgia (TN) affects 4 to 28.9/100 000 people worldwide, and antiepileptic drugs such as carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are the firstline treatment options. However, the efficacy and safety of other antiepileptic drugs remain unclear due to insufficient direct comparisons.
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and acceptability of all currently available antiepileptic agents for the treatment of patients with classical TN.
methodsWe will search the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases for unpublished or undergoing research listed in registry platforms. We will include all randomised controlled trials comparing two different antiepileptic drugs or one antiepileptic drug with placebo in patients with classical TN. The primary outcomes will be the proportion of responders and the number of subjects who dropout during the treatment. The secondary outcomes will include the two primary outcomes but in the follow-up period, changes in the self-reporting assessment scale for neuralgia and quality of life assessment. In terms of network meta-analysis, we will fit our model to a Bayesian framework using the JAGS and pcnetmeta packages of the R project. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol will not disseminate any private patient data. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016048640.
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.