ArticlePloS one2022
Opioid and gabapentinoid prescriptions in England from 2015 to 2020.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- High-dose use of pregabalin and gabapentin in France: a retrospective, population-based cohort study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Trends in gabapentinoid prescribing: A nationwide Danish drug utilization study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- A Hidden Pandemic? Abuse of Gabapentinoids: A Brief Review of Recent Studies.Current drug research reviews · 2025Review
- Experiences and perspectives of adults on using opioids for pain management in the postoperative period: A scoping review protocol.European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConcerns gradually arose about misuse of gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin), especially when used in combination with opioids. Because it can be a driver of usage, trends in prescribing habits may be interesting to analyse. The aim of this study is to examine the evolution of prescriptions of opioids and gabapentinoids in England from 2015 to 2020 at a regional level.
methodsThis study included data from April 2015 to February 2020, focusing on prescribing data, extracted the OpenPrescribing database. We described the evolution of the prescriptions of opioids and gabapentinoids and calculated their ratios for each month. We used Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) to compare data between and within regions (over time).
resultsDuring this period, opioid prescriptions remained stable (from -3.3% to +2.2%/year) and increased for gabapentinoids generally (from +1.5% to +2.2%). The ratio between gabapentinoid to opioid prescriptions increased by more than 20% in 2020 compared to 2015, variably between regions (F(6,406) = [120.2]; P<0.001; LSD Test: P<0.001; ANOVA for repeated measures: P<0.05). In 2019, a decline in the ratio occurred in all regions, but only persisting in the London commissioning region in 2020 (-14.4% in comparison with 2018, 95%CI: -12.8 to -16.3).
conclusionsGabapentinoids are increasingly prescribed in England. The ratio of gabapentinoid to opioid prescriptions in England increased from 2015 to 2020. The reclassification of gabapentinoids as controlled drugs, in 2019, may have been associated with a significant reduction, although larger prescribers may have been less influenced.
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.