SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Heat therapy for primary dysmenorrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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.
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.
- Article
- Long-Term Management and Prevention Strategies for Adolescent Primary Dysmenorrhea: From Precision Diagnosis to Comprehensive Intervention.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Superficial heat therapy in women's health.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Mild Moxibustion Alleviates Primary Dysmenorrhea in Rats Through TRPV1-Associated Modulation of NF-κB Signaling and Uterine Oxidative Stress.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Primary dysmenorrhea is highly prevalent and often suboptimally managed, as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) fail to provide analgesia in 18% of women. This review therefore aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of heat therapy-a widely used self-care method-for both preventing and acutely treating primary dysmenorrhea. Methods: We searched seven databases (CENTRAL, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang) from inception to October 28, 2024 and updated to August 03, 2025. Pairs of reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using a modified Cochrane RoB 1.0 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for pain intensity (converted to 10-cm VAS) and adverse events. Evidence certainty was graded via GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations). Results: We screened 2,733 citations and included 57 RCTs (involving 5,359 female participants). When compared with no treatment, heat therapy may reduce pain intensity to a greater extent after 3 months (25 RCTs, 2,393 females, WMD -1.85 cm, 95% CI -2.29 to -1.41 cm, RD 21%); it may lead to a greater reduction within 24 h of treatment (3 RCTs, 248 females; WMD -3.52 cm, 95% CI -5.01 to -2.02 cm, RD 45%). When compared to NSAIDs, heat therapy may provide comparable or slightly superior pain relief after 3 months of treatment (22 RCTs, 1,938 females, WMD -1.10 cm, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.70 cm, RD 4%), or within 24 h of treatment (2 RCTs, 167 females, WMD -1.50 cm, 95% CI -2.86 to -0.15 cm, RD 16%). For the safety assessment, heat therapy probably reduced the risk of adverse effects compared with NSAIDs (8 RCTs, 728 females, RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.15-0.59). Conclusions: Compared to no treatment, heat therapy is likely to reduce pain intensity both during prophylaxis and acute episodes. When compared to NSAIDs, heat therapy may achieve comparable analgesic efficacy while exhibiting a superior safety profile. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251050944, identifier CRD420251050944.
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.