Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31190968›Full record

ReviewJournal of pain research2019

Tapentadol: an overview of the safety profile.

Enrico Polati, Pier Luigi Canonico, Vittorio Schweiger, Massimo Collino

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Chronic Pain and Opioids in the Elderly: Treating the Brain, Not Just the Body.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Enrico PolatiAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Pain Relief Center, Ospedale Policlinico GB Rossi, Verona, Italy.
Pier Luigi CanonicoDipartimento di Scienze del Farmaco, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
Vittorio SchweigerAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Pain Relief Center, Ospedale Policlinico GB Rossi, Verona, Italy.
Massimo CollinoDepartment of Drug Science and Technology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” · ITUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Long-term opioid therapy may be associated with analgesic efficacy and also predictable adverse events, including cardiovascular and pulmonary events, gastrointestinal disorders, endocrinological harms, psychological problems, impairment of driving ability, and risk of abuse. These effects of opioids are mostly due to the wide expression of the mu receptor. Tapentadol, a centrally acting analgesic, is the first agent of a new class of drugs (MOR-NRI), since it combines two mechanisms of action, namely µ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonism and noradrenaline reuptake inhibition. Noteworthy, MOR activation with tapentadol is markedly lower compared with that exerted by classical opioids, thus likely resulting in fewer opioid-related adverse effects. In this review, we discuss current safety data on tapentadol, with a focus on some specific events, risk of abuse, and driving ability, a well-accepted proxy of the ability of taking critical decisions.

Indexed as

painsafetytapentadol

Identifiers

PMID31190968
PMCPMC6529613
OpenAlexW2946178264

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.