SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
The efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for labor analgesia in the first stage of labor: a qualitative and quantitative analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
Aim: Labor pain represents a significant challenge for parturients during childbirth. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an effective analgesic modality. However, its efficacy and safety for intrapartum analgesia remain unclear. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to comprehensively assess the analgesic effectiveness and safety profile of TENS during the first stage of labor. Methods: We searched databases from inception to October 17, 2024 and updated them to July 22, 2025. Paired researchers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. All meta-analyses were performed via random effects models, and the GRADE approach was employed to evaluate the certainty of evidence. Results: We included 51 randomized controlled trials (10,038 participants, all females). Low evidence showed that compared with the blank control, parturients using TENS may experience more pain relief (WMD -1.98 cm, 95%CI -2.6 to -1.35 cm, the modelled RD 52, 95% CI 37 to 62%), parturients using TENS may shorten the duration of the first stage of labor (WMD -46.78 min,95% CI -61.32 to -32.25 min); compared with the epidural analgesia groups, parturients using TENS may shorten the duration of the first stage of labor (WMD-62.22 min, 95%CI -92.51 to -31.94 min). Conclusion: Compared with the blank control, TENS may reduce pain intensity and shorten the duration of the first stage of labor in parturients, with little to no difference in adverse events. When compared to epidural analgesia, TENS may shorten the duration of the first stage of labor, with very small differences observed in analgesic efficacy or adverse effects. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251066439, identifier PROSPERO (CRD420251066439).
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.