Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38736680›Full record

ReviewJournal of pain research2024

Manual Therapy in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Xia Li, Yanan Sun, Yuhan Wang, Xiyou Wang, Changhe Yu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. An Examination into the Safety and Efficacy of KhapregesicInternational journal of women's health · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Physical agents' level in women with primary dysmenorrhea: A cross-sectional observational study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Observational
  5. Article
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

5 authors.

Xia Li *Tuina and Pain Management Department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Yanan Sun *Traditional Chinese Medicine Department, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Yuhan WangTuina and Pain Management Department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0009-0005-7705-2102
Xiyou WangTuina and Pain Management Department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-9579-1356
Changhe YuTuina and Pain Management Department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-2764-6229

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This research aimed to assess the effectiveness of manual therapy in alleviating pain among women undergoing primary dysmenorrhea (PD). Methods: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding manual therapy for PD were searched from online databases, spanning from their inception to July 2023. The identified literature underwent a thorough screening process, and the data were meticulously extracted and analyzed using RevMan 5.3. Subsequently, the included studies underwent Cochrane's quality assessment and meta-analysis. The evidence obtained was then assessed using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: 32 RCTs, involving 2566 women were finally included for analysis. The overall quality of the concluding evidence was generally rated as low or very low. Performance bias and blind bias were found to be the main risk of bias of the included studies. In comparison to no treatment, manual therapy demonstrated a significant increase in pain relief in short-term (n=191, MD=1.30, 95% CI: 0.24~2.37). The differences in the effects of manual therapy and the placebo on pain intensity may not be statistically significant (n=255, MD=0.10, 95% CI: -0.37~0.58). In contrast to NSAIDs, manual therapy exhibited superior pain alleviation (n=507, MD=3.01, 95% CI: 1.08~4.94) and a higher effective rate (n=1029, OR=4.87, 95% CI: 3.29~7.20). Importantly, no severe adverse events were reported across all studies, indicating a relatively safe profile for manual therapy. Conclusion: Manual therapy presented promise in effectively relieving menstrual pain with minimal adverse events in short term, outperforming both no treatment and NSAIDs. However, this conclusion is tempered by the low quality of the included RCTs, highlighting the necessity for more robust trials to validate it.

Indexed as

manual therapymeta-analysisprimary dysmenorrheasystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38736680
PMCPMC11088071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.