ArticleMedicine2019
Interventions for cancer-related pain: Protocol of an umbrella systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bibliometric Analysis of Research on the Comorbidity of Cancer and Pain.Journal of pain research · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral treatments are beneficial for patients with cancer-related pain (CRP), and there are numbers of systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness and safety of these treatments. However, the overall quality of the evidence has not been quantitatively assessed. The aim of this study is to overcome the inconclusive evidence about the interventions of CRP.
methodsWe will perform an umbrella systematic review to identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A comprehensive literature search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library for systematic reviews, meta-analyses and RCTs. We will describe the general information of the RCTs for participants, interventions, outcome measurements, comparisons, and results. Network meta-analysis will be developed to determine the comparative effectiveness of the treatments.
resultsThe result of this network meta-analysis will provide direct and indirect evidence of treatments for CRP.
conclusionThe conclusion of our study will help clinicians and CRP patients to choose suitable treatment options. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required, as the data are not individualized. The findings of this systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and/or presented at relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019131721.
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.