Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32801852›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2020

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Develop an Efficacy-Safety Profile of Parenteral Analgesics Used in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain.

Stephan Schug, Esther Pogatzki-Zahn, Lawrence D Phillips, Margaret Noyes Essex, Feng Xia, Alison J Reader, Robert Pawinski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

7 authors.

Stephan SchugDiscipline of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0302-2315
Esther Pogatzki-ZahnDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0981-3940
Lawrence D PhillipsDepartment of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Margaret Noyes EssexPfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8168-9791
Feng XiaPfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA.
Alison J ReaderPfizer Ltd, Walton Oaks, Tadworth, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6821-1283
Robert PawinskiPfizer Ltd, Walton Oaks, Tadworth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdentifying the optimal treatment in an acute postoperative setting remains a challenge. Multiple analgesic options are available, but comparing outcomes is limited by a lack of head-to-head trials. In addition, decisions based on efficacy only do not take drug safety into account. In such cases, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can be utilized to quantify and compare the efficacy and safety data of various drugs. METHODOLOGY: The efficacy-safety profiles of eight parenteral, postoperative analgesics (acetaminophen, diclofenac, ketorolac, metamizole, morphine, nefopam, parecoxib, tramadol) widely used in Europe were evaluated using an MCDA model that included 17 criteria: three for efficacy and 14 for safety. Each drug was scored on each criterion on a scale from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), according to published data and the judgment of an expert panel. A weighting process was then applied to standardize the impact of each criterion and adjust drugs' preference scores accordingly, normalizing them on the 0-100 scale. Sensitivity analyses were also performed, including a model in which analgesic profiles were compared when opioid sparing effect was set at a zero value for all drugs.

resultsIn the primary model, efficacy and safety had relative weightings of 64% and 36%, respectively. Efficacy and safety criteria with the highest values were pain relief (relative weight, 29%) and gastrointestinal effects (12%). Parecoxib received the highest overall score (93), followed by diclofenac (80), and ketorolac (75). Morphine scored the lowest (57), due to the lack of an opioid sparing effect. When opioid sparing was given a zero rating, parecoxib remained the highest scoring analgesic (93), followed by diclofenac (80), metamizole (76), and morphine (76). Parecoxib remained the most preferred analgesic in several other sensitivity analyses.

conclusionThis MCDA-based assessment suggests that parecoxib has the most favorable efficacy-safety profile among the assessed postoperative analgesics.

Indexed as

multi-criteria decision analysisparenteral analgesicspostoperative pain

Identifiers

PMID32801852
PMCPMC7415456

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.