ArticleBMJ open2021
Use of glucose for pain management in premature neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The comparative efficacy and safety of sweet solutions to reduce preterm infants' pain levels: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Neonatal pain assessment and non-pharmacological analgesia: an integrative literature review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Effect of glucose on pain relief during invasive procedures in premature infants: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of cortisol as a neonatal pain biomarker in the application of non-pharmacological analgesia therapies: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Non-Pharmacological Methods in the Reduction of Neonatal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Maternal facilitated tucking versus nurse facilitated tucking for alleviation of pain during neonatal heel lancing: A randomised, two-period, cross-over trial.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Trial
- Parent-led neonatal pain management-a narrative review and update of research and practices.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Excitatory and inhibitory neuronal signaling in inflammatory and diabetic neuropathic pain.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTherapeutic management of neonatal pain is essential to reduce changes in initial and subsequent development. Although glucose has been shown to be effective in relieving pain, concentrations and dosages remain to be standardised. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to identify the efficacy of glucose as an analgesic in preterm infants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Medline, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature and Embase databases will be researched for randomised studies published until December 2021. This systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies investigating the use of glucose for pain control in premature neonates. The primary outcome will be pain relief. Three independent reviewers will select the studies and extract the data from original publications. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data synthesis will be performed using the Review Manager software (RevMan V.5.2.3). We will evaluate heterogeneity based on I ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the research will not be required for this systematic review. The results of this study will be published in an international journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This protocol was submitted to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, number CRD42021236217).
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.