ArticlePloS one2018
Using time series analysis approaches for improved prediction of pain outcomes in subgroups of patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Multi-Center Trial of Pregabalin Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain Associated With Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy
A 14-Week, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study To Evaluate The Safety And Efficacy Of Pregabalin (150mg-600mg/Day) Using A Flexible Optimal Dose Schedule In Patients With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN).
A 13 Week, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 4 Trial of Pregabalin (CI-1008, 600 mg/Day) for Relief of Pain in Subjects With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy
Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Study To Evaluate Efficacy And Safety Of Pregabalin (CI-1008) In The Treatment For Pain Associated With Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moving towards the use of artificial intelligence in pain management.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Enhanced Patient-Centricity: How the Biopharmaceutical Industry Is Optimizing Patient Care through AI/ML/DL.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Predictive Modeling Identifies Total Bleeds at 12-Weeks Postswitch to N8-GP Prophylaxis as a Predictor of Treatment Response.Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Security Risk Level Prediction of Carbofuran Pesticide Residues in Chinese Vegetables Based on Deep Learning.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Voting-Based Ensemble Deep Learning Method Focused on Multi-Step Prediction of Food Safety Risk Levels: Applications in Hazard Analysis of Heavy Metals in Grain Processing Products.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Integrating Machine Learning With Microsimulation to Classify Hypothetical, Novel Patients for Predicting Pregabalin Treatment Response Based on Observational and Randomized Data in Patients With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.Pragmatic and observational research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prior work applied hierarchical clustering, coarsened exact matching (CEM), time series regressions with lagged variables as inputs, and microsimulation to data from three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and a large German observational study (OS) to predict pregabalin pain reduction outcomes for patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Here, data were added from six RCTs to reduce covariate bias of the same OS and improve accuracy and/or increase the variety of patients for pain response prediction. Using hierarchical cluster analysis and CEM, a matched dataset was created from the OS (N = 2642) and nine total RCTs (N = 1320). Using a maximum likelihood method, we estimated weekly pain scores for pregabalin-treated patients for each cluster (matched dataset); the models were validated with RCT data that did not match with OS data. We predicted novel 'virtual' patient pain scores over time using simulations including instance-based machine learning techniques to assign novel patients to a cluster, then applying cluster-specific regressions to predict pain response trajectories. Six clusters were identified according to baseline variables (gender, age, insulin use, body mass index, depression history, pregabalin monotherapy, prior gabapentin, pain score, and pain-related sleep interference score). CEM yielded 1766 patients (matched dataset) having lower covariate imbalances. Regression models for pain performed well (adjusted R-squared 0.90-0.93; root mean square errors 0.41-0.48). Simulations showed positive predictive values for achieving >50% and >30% change-from-baseline pain score improvements (range 68.6-83.8% and 86.5-93.9%, respectively). Using more RCTs (nine vs. the earlier three) enabled matching of 46.7% more patients in the OS dataset, with substantially reduced global imbalance vs. not matching. This larger RCT pool covered 66.8% of possible patient characteristic combinations (vs. 25.0% with three original RCTs) and made prediction possible for a broader spectrum of patients. Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov (as applicable): NCT00156078, NCT00159679, NCT00143156, NCT00553475.
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.