Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36367322›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2023

A systematic review and meta-analysis of neuropathic pain associated with coronavirus disease 2019.

Giulia Di Stefano, Pietro Falco, Eleonora Galosi, Giuseppe Di Pietro, Caterina Leone, Andrea Truini

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of pain (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Beyond the acute: pain in long COVID survivors at 1.5 years.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Giulia Di StefanoDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Pietro FalcoDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Eleonora GalosiDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe Di PietroDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Caterina LeoneDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Andrea TruiniDepartment of Human Neuroscience, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2630-7647
Sapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveNeuropathic pain is an occasionally reported complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that has received increased attention in scientific literature. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to provide information on the frequency of neuropathic pain associated with COVID-19. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: We systematically reviewed and analysed literature regarding neuropathic pain associated with COVID-19. Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. We considered prospective and retrospective studies published up until September 2022 (limitations included English language, full-text publications and studies including at least 10 patients). A random effects meta-analysis was performed and heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.

resultsWe identified 149 studies. We included 17 studies in the systematic review, and six studies reporting the frequency of neuropathic pain in the acute/subacute phase of COVID-19 in the meta-analysis. The estimated frequency of neuropathic pain ranged between 0.4 and 25%. Forest plot analysis showed that the random effect overall frequency was 10% (95% confidence interval: 5%-15%), with a high level of heterogeneity (Chi

conclusionsThe pooled estimated frequency of neuropathic pain associated with COVID-19 should be considered with caution due to the high heterogeneity across studies and the poor description of the neuropathic pain diagnostic criteria applied. SIGNIFICANCE: Emerging evidence supports the development of neuropathic pain as a complication of COVID-19. However, longitudinal studies enrolling consecutive patients with COVID-19 that detail the diagnostic criteria for neuropathic pain are needed to better assess the frequency of this condition.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeuralgiaHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36367322
PMCPMC9877974
OpenAlexW4308766112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.