Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Gabapentina para el dolor neuropático crónico y la fibromialgia en adultos

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007938.pub2Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 16 marzo 2011see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Dolor y cuidados paliativos

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • R Andrew Moore

    Correspondencia a: Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    [email protected]

  • Philip J Wiffen

    UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford, UK

  • Sheena Derry

    Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

  • Henry J McQuay

    Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Contributions of authors

PW registered the title. PW, RAM, and SD wrote the protocol.

PW, SD, and RAM assessed inclusion of papers and extracted data.

RAM wrote up the review. All authors contributed to the final draft and approved the published version.

PW will be responsible for the update.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • No sources of support supplied

External sources

  • NHS Cochrane Collaboration Programme Grant Scheme, UK.

  • European Union Biomed 2 Grant no. BMH4 CT95 0172, UK.

Declarations of interest

SD, RAM and HJM have received research support from charities, government and industry sources at various times. RAM and HJM have consulted for various pharmaceutical companies. RAM and HJM have received lecture fees from pharmaceutical companies related to analgesics and other healthcare interventions. PW is a full‐time employee of the UK Cochrane Centre, funded by the UK National Institute of Health Research.

None of the authors have received any funds from any company with an interest in gabapentin for research on gabapentin, and none from any source for the production of this review. HJM at one time was paid by Pfizer to act on a Data Safety and Monitoring board (DSMB) for pregabalin trials (since abandoned).

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Dr Thomas Perry for directing us to clinical trial reports and synopses of published and unpublished studies of gabapentin, and Dr Mike Clarke and colleagues for their advice and support.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2017 Jun 09

Gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults

Review

Philip J Wiffen, Sheena Derry, Rae Frances Bell, Andrew SC Rice, Thomas Rudolf Tölle, Tudor Phillips, R Andrew Moore

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007938.pub4

2014 Apr 27

Gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

Review

R Andrew Moore, Philip J Wiffen, Sheena Derry, Andrew SC Rice

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007938.pub3

2011 Mar 16

Gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

Review

R Andrew Moore, Philip J Wiffen, Sheena Derry, Henry J McQuay

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007938.pub2

2009 Jul 08

Gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults

Protocol

R Andrew Moore, Philip J Wiffen, Sheena Derry, Henry J McQuay

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007938

Differences between protocol and review

The protocol for the original gabapentin review (Wiffen 2005) was superceded and split, and an updated protocol produced for this review, to reflect, at least in part, the more recent developments in understanding of potential biases in chronic pain trials, and new outcomes of direct relevance to patients. The main difference between the original review and the updated protocol for this review, was more emphasis being given to a set of core outcomes, although all of those outcomes were included in the updated protocol.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.