SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
A scoping review of models for predicting the risk of postherpetic neuralgia.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk prediction models for postherpetic neuralgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- A Novel Machine Learning Signature Incorporating Lipid and Inflammatory Biomarkers to Predict Pulsed Radiofrequency Efficacy in Zoster-Associated Pain.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Postherpetic neuralgia risk prediction in hospitalised patients with herpes zoster based on MIMIC-IV.Medicine · 2026Article
- Development and External Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Postherpetic Neuralgia Risk in Patients with Herpes Zoster: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To conduct a scoping review of risk prediction models for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), providing insights for clinical identification of patients at high risk and future research. Methods: China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, VIP Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from database establishment to 25 October 2024, and data on the prevalence of PHN, model construction, predictors and model performance were extracted for summary analysis. Results: A total of 23 studies were included, with a high overall risk of bias. The prevalence of PHN ranged from 6.20 to 48.00%, with traditional logistic regression being the predominant model construction method. The three most frequently identified predictive factors were age, rash area and pain severity score. Additionally, 43.48% of the studies did not validate their models, and 52.17% used visualization methods to present their models. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the studies was 0.714-0.980. Two studies performed external validation; 14 studies evaluated the model's calibration, and the calibration curve coincided well with the actual curve; and eight studies assessed the clinical benefit. Conclusion: Risk prediction models for PHN all showed good predictive performance, but the risk of bias was high, and further clinical validation is needed. In the future, research could refine variable selection and model performance evaluation to optimize predictive models continuously, aiming to develop models with excellent predictive performance and strong clinical utility. Systematic review registration: DOl: https://doi.org/10.17605/0SF.IO/SUR2C.
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.