ArticleCureus2021
Efficacy of Ginger in the Treatment of Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orally consumed ginger and human health: an umbrella review.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Ginger supplementation and metabolic health: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized trials.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Review
- Long-Term Management and Prevention Strategies for Adolescent Primary Dysmenorrhea: From Precision Diagnosis to Comprehensive Intervention.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Ginger from Farmyard to Town: Nutritional and Pharmacological Applications.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been evidenced that very few systematic reviews have examined the effectiveness of ginger for pain duration and its severity among women with primary dysmenorrhea. This meta-analysis was therefore performed to methodically incorporate and significantly evaluate randomized controlled ginger studies for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. The literature was searched using PubMed, Embase, Ovid, ClinicalKey, Medline, and electronic database. We have analyzed clinical trials by comparing ginger with placebo and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in women with primary dysmenorrhea. The primary outcomes assessed in our meta-analysis were pain severity and pain duration. Secondary outcomes were change in bleeding, side effects of the drug, and rate of satisfaction. We have screened a total of 638 studies, out of which narrative synthesis was formulated for eight studies. We have performed a meta-analysis of five trials examining ginger with placebo and other two randomized controlled trials comparing ginger with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID); it seems to be more helpful for relieving menstrual pain than a placebo (mean difference [MD] = 2.67, 95% CI = 3.51-1.84, P = 0.0001, I2 = 86%), although it was found that ginger and NSAIDs were equally effective in pain severity (risk ratios [RR] = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.53-2.52, P = 0.72, I2 =77%). We have not observed any significant difference between ginger and placebo on pain duration among primary dysmenorrheic women (MD = -2.22, 95% CI = -7.62-3.18, P = 0.42, I2
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.