Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32934804›Full record

Trial reportF1000Research2020

Analgesic efficacy of intravenous nefopam after spine surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Jatuporn Eiamcharoenwit, Haruthai Chotisukarat, Kanjana Tainil, Nalinrat Attanath, Phuping Akavipat

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Analgesic effect of intravenous nefopam for postoperative pain in spine surgery: a meta-analysis of RCTs.International journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jatuporn EiamcharoenwitDepartment of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, 312, Ratchawithi Road, Thung Phaya Thai, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-7707-0176
Haruthai ChotisukaratDepartment of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, 312, Ratchawithi Road, Thung Phaya Thai, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Kanjana TainilDepartment of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, 312, Ratchawithi Road, Thung Phaya Thai, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Nalinrat AttanathDepartment of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, 312, Ratchawithi Road, Thung Phaya Thai, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Phuping AkavipatDepartment of Anesthesiology, Prasat Neurological Institute, 312, Ratchawithi Road, Thung Phaya Thai, Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Neurological Institute of Thailand · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Spinal FusionAgedAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedNefopamPostoperative PainAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticNefopamNon-opioid analgesics; Postoperative pain; Morphine consumption

Identifiers

PMID32934804
PMCPMC7477643
OpenAlexW3032921924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.