ArticleThe journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research2021
Development and validation of a real-time method characterizing spontaneous pain in women with dysmenorrhea.
Article in The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Exploring predictors of analgesic response in adult women regularly using NSAIDs: insights from a machine learning approach.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging-based investigation of the role of perfusion and oxygen availability in menstrual pain.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
- Scientific Knowledge Graph of Dysmenorrhea: A Bibliometric Analysis from 2001 to 2021.Journal of pain research · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimPrior research has primarily focused on static pain assessment, largely ignoring the dynamic nature of pain over time. We used a novel assessment tool for characterizing pain duration, frequency, and amplitude in women with dysmenorrhea and evaluated how these metrics were affected by naproxen treatment.
methodsDysmenorrheic women (n = 25) rated their menstrual pain by squeezing a pressure bulb proportional to the magnitude of their pain. To evaluate whether bulb squeezing was affected by naproxen, we compared parameters before and after naproxen. We also analyzed the correlation between pain relief on a numerical rating scale to changes in bulb squeezing parameters. Random bulb-squeezing activity in pain-free participants (n = 14) was used as a control for nonspecific effects or bias.
resultsIn dysmenorrheic women, naproxen reduced the duration of the squeezing during a painful bout, the number of painful bouts and bout intensity. Before naproxen, the correlation between these bulb squeeze parameters and self-reported pain on numeric rating scale was not significant (R
conclusionOur study demonstrates a convenient technique for continuous pain assessment, capturing three different dimensions: duration, frequency, and magnitude. Naproxen may act by reducing the duration and frequency of episodic pain in addition to reducing the severity. After further validation, these methods could be used for other pain conditions for deeper phenotyping and assessing novel treatments.
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.