ArticleBritish journal of pain2019
Chronic pelvic pain in women: an embedded qualitative study to evaluate the perceived benefits of the meridian balance method electro-acupuncture treatment, health consultation and National Health Service standard care.
Article in British journal of pain, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometriosis: new insights and opportunities for relief of symptoms.Biology of reproduction · 2025Review
- Adaptation and Validation of the International Pelvic Pain Society's Quality of Life Questionnaire in Portuguese.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic pelvic pain (CPP) - defined as intermittent or constant pain in the lower abdomen or pelvis of at least 6 months' duration, not occurring exclusively with menstruation or intercourse and not associated with pregnancy - is estimated to affect 6-27% of women worldwide. In the United Kingdom, over 1 million women suffer from CPP, which has been highlighted as a key area of unmet need. Current medical treatments for CPP are often associated with unacceptable side effects. A specific style of acupuncture, the meridian balance method electro-acupuncture (BMEA) and traditional Chinese medicine health consultation (TCM HC (BMEA + TCM HC = BMEA treatment)), may be effective for CPP in women.
aimThree focus group discussions and semi-structured telephone interviews were embedded in a randomised controlled feasibility trial to gain in-depth description of the perceived benefits of the participants' respective interventions.
methodsWomen with CPP were randomised into the BMEA treatment, TCM HC or National Health Service standard care (NHS SC). Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted post focus group discussions.
findingsA total of 30 women were randomised into BMEA treatment, TCM HC or NHS SC. A total of 11 participants attended the three focus group discussions. Thematic analysis of focus group discussions showed: a perceived pain reduction, enhanced sleep, energy level and sense of well-being in the BMEA treatment and TCM HC groups; a dislike for the adverse effects of medications, frustration at the lack of effective treatment, heavy reliance on medications and services that are helpful, in the NHS SC group. Semi-structured telephone interviews showed that the methodology was acceptable to the participants.
conclusionThe embedded focus group discussions captured the rich and complex narratives of the participants and provided insights into the perceived benefits of the BMEA treatment, TCM HC and NHS SC interventions.
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.