Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30262984›Full record

ReviewSubstance abuse : research and treatment2018

Gabapentin for Off-Label Use: Evidence-Based or Cause for Concern?

Alyssa M Peckham, Kirk E Evoy, Leslie Ochs, Jordan R Covvey

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Substance abuse : research and treatment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alyssa M PeckhamSchool of Pharmacy, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9638-7005
Kirk E EvoyCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Leslie OchsDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, University of New England, Portland, ME, USA.
Jordan R CovveyDivision of Pharmaceutical, Administrative and Social Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2913-2042
Austin College · USDuquesne University · USNew England College · USNortheastern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gabapentin is widely used in the United States for a number of off-label indications, often as an alternative to opioid therapy. Increasing evidence has emerged suggesting that gabapentin may not be as benign as once thought and may be associated with substance abuse in concert with opioids. With concerns for safety mounting, it is prudent to examine the efficacy of gabapentin across its many uses to understand the risk-benefit balance. Reviews on off-label indications such as migraine, fibromyalgia, mental illness, and substance dependence have found modest to no effect on relevant clinical outcomes. This high-quality evidence has often been overshadowed by uncontrolled studies and limited case reports. Furthermore, the involvement of gabapentin in questionable marketing schemes further calls its use into question. Overall, clinicians should exercise rigorous appraisal of the available evidence for a given indication, and researchers should conduct larger, higher-quality studies to better assess the efficacy of gabapentin for many of its off-label uses.

Indexed as

marketing of health servicesoff-label usepainsubstance-related disordersTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID30262984
PMCPMC6153543
OpenAlexW2894221331

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.