SynthesisInternational urogynecology journal2022
Is gabapentin effective and safe in the treatment of chronic pelvic pain in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International urogynecology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phytochemical Modulators of Nociception: A Review of Cannabis Terpenes in Chronic Pain Syndromes.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisChronic pelvic pain (CPP) affects 2.1-24% of women, causing physical and psychological damage to women around the world. Based on the efficacy of gabapentin in the treatment of chronic pain, we conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in reducing pain in women with CPP.
methodsSystematic searches were performed in the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Clinicalkey databases. Studies focused on comparing the efficacy of gabapentin and placebo in the treatment of female CPP patients were included. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyze the results and risk of bias. Two investigators independently selected eligible studies and extracted related pain scores and side effects for meta-analysis.
resultsIn total, 4 RCTs were enrolled in the meta-analysis, totaling 425 patients. Among patients receiving gabapentin, the average pain scores in 3 and 6 months were significantly lower than those in the placebo group(p < 0.00001). The results showed that there was no statistical difference between gabapentin and placebo in the reduction of pain scores from baseline(p = 0.41). The incidence of side effects in the gabapentin group was significantly higher than that in the placebo group (p < 0.00001).
conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that for women with CPP, gabapentin was significantly different from placebo in average pain scores at 3 and 6 months. However, the two drugs did not differ in the reduction in pain scores from baseline. Gabapentin can bring more significant side effects, whether they are common side effects or serious side effects.
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.