ArticleBMJ open2023
Efficacy of botulinum toxin A injection in pelvic floor muscles in chronic pelvic pain patients: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin A Injection in Pelvic Floor Muscles in Chronic Pelvic Pain Patients: A Double-Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Trial
- Botulinum Toxin A Injection Versus Placebo as Treatment for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Evaluating the Influence of Patients' Pretreatment Expectations.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Botulinum Toxin A Injection Treatment in Chronic Pelvic Pain Patients: Open-Label Extension Study and 12-Month Follow-Up After RCT.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- The pelvic floor: myth or hype?-a narrative review.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2026Review
- Effects of warm silver needle acupuncture combined with myofascial trigger point intervention on peripheral neutrophil autophagy and alleviation of chronic pelvic pain in women.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
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
introductionChronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a common multifactorial condition affecting 6%-27% of women aged 18-50 years worldwide. The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to investigate the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin A (BTA) injection compared with placebo injections in the pelvic floor muscles in women with CPP to improve pain, function and quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded placebo controlled RCT conducted in five gynaecology departments across the Netherlands. A total of 94 women over 16 years, with at least 6 months of CPP without anatomical cause and pelvic floor hypertonicity refractory to first-line pelvic floor physical therapy will be included. Participants will be randomised equally to BTA or placebo, both following physical therapy and (re-)education on the pelvic floor at 4, 8, 12 and 26 weeks after intervention. Multiple validated questionnaires focusing on pain, quality of life and sexual function will be collected at baseline and during all follow-up visits. Statistical analysis includes mixed models for repeated measurements. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval (NL61409.091.17) was obtained from Radboud University Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC) and Central Committee on Research involving human Subjects (CCMO). The findings will be presented through international conferences and peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT number (2017-001296-23), CCMO/METC number: NL61409.091.17.
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.