SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Photobiomodulation as a promising approach in the management of nipple lesions during breastfeeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nipple injuries are common and can cause intense pain, leading to early weaning in breastfeeding. This study investigates the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) in reducing pain and promoting the healing of nipple lesions in lactating women. The protocol of this study was registered in PROSPERO and followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2020). Electronic searches were conducted (PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and grey literature) until March-2024. The eligibility criteria were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Meta-analysis was conducted using R software with the "META" package. The Odds Ratio (OR) effect measurement was calculated, and a fixed-effect model was applied with a confidence interval of 95%. The Cochrane collaboration tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and the GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of evidence. A total of 924 records were screened, and 7 studies meeting the criteria were included in this review. The findings indicated a notable decrease in breastfeeding-related pain, along with expedited healing of nipple injuries and improvement in quality of life among participants receiving PBM compared with control group. In addition, a meta-analysis confirmed less sucking pain for the PBM group OR 0.43 ([95% CI - 0.23 to 0.79]; p = 0.001). Most studies had a low risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence was classified as low. The results suggest that PBM may be a promising therapeutic approach to reduce pain and improve the healing of nipple lesions. However, more robust, and methodologically standardized randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm and elucidate these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40500396What 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.