capsaicin

• number needed to treat, about 50% pain reduction, musculoskeletal conditions

  increases, n = 368

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.025% or plaster compared with placebo was 1.5 (1.1 to 2.0) and the number needed to treat was 8.1 (4.6 to 34)

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• number needed to treat, about 50% pain reduction, neuropathic conditions

  increases, n = 656

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.075% compared with placebo was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7) and the number needed to treat was 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0)

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• number of patients with about a 50% reduction in pain, extracted at eight weeks for neuropathic conditions, relative benefit and number needed to treat for topical capsaicin 0.075% versus placebo; local adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events as secondary outcomes

  increases, relative benefit 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7), NNT 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0), capsaicin 0.075% versus placebo, six trials

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.075% compared with placebo was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7) and the number needed to treat was 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0).

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• number of patients with about a 50% reduction in pain, topical capsaicin 0.075% versus placebo in neuropathic conditions, relative benefit and NNT

  relative benefit 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7), NNT 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0)

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.075% compared with placebo was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7) and the number needed to treat was 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0).

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• relative benefit, about 50% pain reduction, musculoskeletal conditions

  increases, n = 368

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.025% or plaster compared with placebo was 1.5 (1.1 to 2.0) and the number needed to treat was 8.1 (4.6 to 34)

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• relative benefit, about 50% pain reduction, neuropathic conditions

  increases, n = 656

  The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.075% compared with placebo was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7) and the number needed to treat was 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0)

  PMID:15033881 · one of two readings recorded this

• coughing or sneezing, proportion of participants

  increases, n = 282

  The proportion of participants experiencing coughing or sneezing with capsaicin (0.075%) was 9.2% (26/282, range 0% to 13%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• coughing or sneezing, proportion of participants

  n = 275

  The proportion of participants experiencing coughing or sneezing with placebo was 1.4% (4/275, range 0% to 3%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• coughing or sneezing, relative risk

  increases

  The RR of treatment compared with placebo was 5.7 (2.1 to 15)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• local skin reaction, proportion of participants

  increases, n = 282

  The proportion of participants experiencing a local skin reaction with capsaicin (0.075%) was 63% (179/282, range 31% to 93%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• local skin reaction, proportion of participants

  n = 275

  The proportion of participants experiencing a local skin reaction with placebo was 24% (66/275, range 9% to 40%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• local skin reaction, relative risk

  increases

  The RR of treatment compared with placebo was 2.6 (2.1 to 3.3)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• mean percentage decrease in pain intensity

  decreases

  This was significantly greater for participants using capsaicin (40%) than for those using placebo (28%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNH for coughing or sneezing over 6 to 8 weeks

  increases

  The NNH for experiencing coughing or sneezing over 6 to 8 weeks of treatment was 13 (8.7 to 25)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNH for local skin reaction over 6 to 8 weeks

  increases

  The NNH for experiencing a local skin reaction over 6 to 8 weeks of treatment was 2.5 (2.1 to 3.1)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNT for successful treatment over 12 weeks

  increases

  The NNT for successful treatment over 12 weeks was 12 (6.4 to 69)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNT for successful treatment over 6 to 8 weeks

  increases

  The NNT for successful treatment over 6 to 8 weeks was 6.6 (4.1 to 17)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion of participants with clinical improvement (at least 50% pain relief or equivalent global or categorical measure, mixed definitions across trials) in chronic neuropathic pain after topical capsaicin 0.075% cream versus placebo cream over 6 to 8 weeks; local skin reactions; withdrawals

  increases

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The NNT for successful treatment over 6 to 8 weeks was 6.6 (4.1 to 17).

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion of participants with clinical improvement (at least 50% pain relief or equivalent) in chronic neuropathic pain, topical capsaicin 0.075% cream versus placebo, RB and NNT

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The NNT for successful treatment over 6 to 8 weeks was 6.6 (4.1 to 17).

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion with successful treatment (at least 30% pain relief, weeks 2 to 12)

  increases, n = 431

  The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with capsaicin (8%) was 39% (167/431, range 34% to 44%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion with successful treatment (at least 30% pain relief, weeks 2 to 12)

  n = 278

  The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with placebo was 30% (84/278, range 18% to 35%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion with successful treatment (clinical improvement) over 6 to 8 weeks

  increases, n = 198

  The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with capsaicin (0.075%) was 41% (81/198, range 20% to 64%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion with successful treatment (clinical improvement) over 6 to 8 weeks

  n = 191

  The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with placebo was 26% (49/191, range 6% to 63%)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• relative benefit of successful treatment, capsaicin 0.075% vs placebo

  increases

  The RB of treatment compared with placebo was 1.6 (1.2 to 2.1)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• relative benefit of successful treatment, capsaicin 8% vs placebo

  increases

  The RB of treatment compared with placebo was 1.4 (1.1 to 1.7)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• relative risk and NNT, studies with outcomes including less than 50% improvement

  increases, n = 265

  The four studies; with outcomes including less than 50% improvement included 265 participants and gave a RR of 1.5 (1.1 to 2.0) and NNT of 6.6 (3.7 to 28)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• withdrawals due to adverse events, relative risk (multiple low doses)

  increases

  giving a relative risk of 5.0 (2.3 to 11) and a NNT of 8.1 (5.7 to 14)

  PMID:19821411 · one of two readings recorded this

• at least 30% VAS improvement, relative risk

  increases

  Abrams et al +Ellis et al | Combined smoked cannabis studies | 122 (106) | 31/61 | 15/61 | 2.38 (1.38 to 4.10) | 3.38 (2.19 to 7.50)

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• at least 30% VAS improvement, relative risk

  increases

  Abrams et al 2007 | Smoked cannabis: 3.56% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol | 55 (50) | 13/27 | 6/28 | 2.17 (0.97 to 4.86) | 3.86 (1.98 to 71.11)

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• at least 30% VAS improvement, relative risk

  increases

  Ellis et al 2009 | Smoked cannabis: 8% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol | 68 (56) | 18/34 | 7/34 | 2.57 (1.24 to 5.35) | 3.09 (1.98 to 9.30)

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• Gracely pain score change baseline to week 14

  no effect, p = 0.99

  The difference between amitriptyline and placebo was: 0.00 95%CI(−0.18 to 0.19) p = 0.99

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNT for at least 30% NPRS pain reduction (capsaicin 8% patch, informative, placebo presumed true)

  an NNT of 6.46 95%CI(3.86–19.69) was calculated for treatment with capsaicin 8% patch

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• NNT for at least 30% VAS improvement

  increases

  an NNT for smoked cannabis was calculated as 3.38 95%CI (2.19 to 7.50)

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• NPRS mean change baseline to week 14

  no effect, p = 0.39

  pregabalin −2.88; placebo −2.63, p = 0.39

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• NRS (0-10) change from baseline to week 4

  no effect, p = 0.05

  Paice JA et al 2000 | 26(14) | Parallel:4 wks. | Capsaicin 0.075% cream q.d.s. (n = 15); placebo (n = 11) | 0.075% q.d.s. | NRS (0–10): change from baseline to wk 4. | No numeric data given. Stated no statistically significant difference between capsaicin 0.075% and placebo (p>0.05) | No

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity on a 0-10 numeric rating scale for topical capsaicin 0.075% cream versus placebo, and percentage reduction in NPRS for capsaicin 8% patch versus 0.04% capsaicin control patch, each a single trial narrated; no pooled capsaicin estimate

  authors of the single 0.075% cream trial stated no superiority over placebo; only graphical data presented

  Not recorded as a finding: a review that discusses its trials without pooling them

  The authors stated that no superiority of capsaicin 0.075% over placebo in mean improvement in a numeric rating score (NRS) (0–10) was seen, however only graphical data were presented.

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• percentage change in NPRS, baseline to week 12 (capsaicin 8% patch vs capsaicin 0.04%)

  decreases, p = 0.0026

  Simpson DM et al 2008 | 307(274) | Parallel: 12 wks follow-up. | Capsaicin 8% patch for 30min (n = 72); 60min (n = 78); 90min (n = 75); placebo (capsaicin 0.04%) (n = 82) | 8% for 90min. | NPRS: % change baseline to wk 12. | ITT with LOCF: Capsaicin: −22.8 (SD 30.6); placebo −10.7 (SD 30.8); (p = 0.0026) | Yes

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• percentage reduction in Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) from baseline to weeks 2 to 12 after a single 8% capsaicin patch application in painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy; also NRS (0-10) mean improvement with capsaicin 0.075% cream, graphical data only

  decreases, 8% capsaicin -22.8 (SD 30.6) versus placebo -10.7 (SD 30.8) percent change in NPRS, p = 0.0026

  Not recorded as a finding: the comparison was against another active treatment

  Capsaicin 8% was found to be superior to placebo in the percentage reduction of the NPRS (SD) from baseline to week 2 to 12: 8% capsaicin: −22.8 (30.6); compared to placebo: −10.7 (30.8), (p = 0.0026).

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• responder rate, at least 30% mean NPRS pain reduction

  increases, p = 0.0092

  capsaicin 8%: 76/225; placebo (capsaicin 0.04%): 15/82; p = 0.0092

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS (0-100mm) improvement baseline to end of treatment, neurotoxic ARV-exposed stratum

  decreases, p = 0.003

  lamotrigine: −27.1; compared to placebo: −9.0; p = 0.003

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS (0-100mm) median change baseline to week 4

  no effect

  gabapentin: −44.1, placebo: −29.8

  PMID:21203440 · one of two readings recorded this

• energy expenditure

  increases

  Evidence indicates that capsaicin and capsiate both augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, especially at high doses

  PMID:22038945 · one of two readings recorded this

• fat oxidation

  increases

  Evidence indicates that capsaicin and capsiate both augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, especially at high doses

  PMID:22038945 · one of two readings recorded this

• orexigenic sensations (appetite)

  decreases

  the balance of the literature suggests that capsaicin and capsiate suppress orexigenic sensations

  PMID:22038945 · one of two readings recorded this

• thermogenic outcomes (energy expenditure and fat oxidation) and appetitive sensations (orexigenic sensations) of capsaicin and capsiate in humans, meta-analysis of thermogenic outcomes

  increases, augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, especially at high doses; no numeric estimate in the abstract

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  Evidence indicates that capsaicin and capsiate both augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, especially at high doses.

  PMID:22038945 · one of two readings recorded this

• thermogenic outcomes (energy expenditure, fat oxidation) and appetitive sensations after capsaicin and capsiate, critical review with meta-analyses of thermogenic outcomes

  increases, abstract states both compounds augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, no estimate given

  Not recorded as a finding: no estimate is reported anywhere

  Evidence indicates that capsaicin and capsiate both augment energy expenditure and enhance fat oxidation, especially at high doses.

  PMID:22038945 · one of two readings recorded this

• osteoarthritis pain, indirect network comparison of topical NSAIDs against capsaicin as licensed, pooled Hedges effect size

  no effect

  Not recorded as a finding: Comparator is an active drug (topical NSAID) via indirect comparison, not absence of capsaicin

  Using placebo as a common comparator, no statistically significant differences remained between topical NSAIDs and capsaicin used as licensed.

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• osteoarthritis pain relief at or nearest 4 weeks, Hedges effect size pooled across pain instruments, topical capsaicin versus placebo in a network meta-analysis

  no effect, capsaicin versus placebo estimate did not reach statistical significance overall

  Not recorded as a finding: the supporting sentence never names the compound

  In contrast, the ES estimate between capsaicin and placebo was associated with considerable variability and did not reach statistical significance.

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Capsaicin vs placebo | Direct | 5 | 0.27 | −0.01 to 0.54 | 0.27 | −0.02 to 0.56

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Capsaicin vs placebo | Direct | 5 | 0.27 | −0.01 to 0.54 | 0.27 | −0.02 to 0.56

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Capsaicin vs placebo | Direct | 4 | 0.41 | 0.17 to 0.64 | 0.41 | 0.16 to 0.66

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Capsaicin vs placebo | Direct | 4 | 0.41 | 0.17 to 0.64 | 0.41 | 0.16 to 0.66

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Topical NSAID vs placebo | Direct | 23 | 0.30 | 0.19 to 0.41 | 0.30 | 0.19 to 0.43

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Topical NSAID vs placebo | Direct | 23 | 0.30 | 0.19 to 0.41 | 0.30 | 0.19 to 0.43

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Topical NSAID vs placebo | Direct | 13 | 0.32 | 0.24 to 0.39 | 0.32 | 0.24 to 0.42

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  increases

  Topical NSAID vs placebo | Direct | 13 | 0.32 | 0.24 to 0.39 | 0.32 | 0.24 to 0.42

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Topical NSAIDs vs capsaicin | Indirect | 28 | 0.04 | −0.26 to 0.33 | 0.04 | −0.28 to 0.35

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Topical NSAIDs vs capsaicin | Indirect | 28 | 0.04 | −0.26 to 0.33 | 0.04 | −0.28 to 0.35

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Topical NSAIDs vs capsaicin | Indirect | 17 | −0.09 | −0.34 to 0.16 | −0.09 | −0.35 to 0.18

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks

  no effect

  Topical NSAIDs vs capsaicin | Indirect | 17 | −0.09 | −0.34 to 0.16 | −0.09 | −0.35 to 0.18

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Capsaicin | 38.1 | 41.1

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Capsaicin | 76.5 | 74.1

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Placebo | 0.0 | 0.0

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Placebo | 0.0 | 0.0

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Topical NSAID | 61.9 | 58.9

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• probability of being the best treatment

  Topical NSAID | 23.5 | 25.9

  PMID:30172837 · one of two readings recorded this

• Cohen's d standardized effect of primary AUC

  decreases

  Based on the primary end point and the pooled SD, the Cohen's d standardized effect was calculated as 0.68

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Maximum average procedural pain score at rest, before injection vs 30 min after study treatment

  The maximum average pain scores at rest (range 0–4) before injection were 1.6, 1.7, and 1.7, respectively, and at 30 minutes after injection of study treatment they were 0.7, 1.2, and 1.6

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Number needed to harm

  Based on these events, the NNH at 12 and 24 weeks was 58 and 237 patients, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Number needed to harm

  Based on these events, the NNH at 12 and 24 weeks was 58 and 237 patients, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Number needed to treat for ≥50% pain improvement

  The NNT at weeks 12 and 24 was 3.6 and 10.3 patients, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Number needed to treat for ≥50% pain improvement

  The NNT at weeks 12 and 24 was 3.6 and 10.3 patients, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Patient-Specific Functional Scale

  increases, p = 0.1

  functional activity of the index knee was significantly improved with CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg versus placebo at each follow‐up visit from week 4 through week 16 (P < 0.10 at each time point)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Patients reporting no procedural pain 10 min after lidocaine injection

  Ten minutes after lidocaine injection, most patients (70%, 71%, and 66% in the placebo, CNTX‐4975 0.5 mg, and CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg groups, respectively) reported no procedural pain

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Patients with moderately severe-to-severe procedural pain at maximum

  No‐to‐moderate pain was recorded in 93%, 85%, and 80% and moderately severe–to‐severe pain in 7%, 15%, and 20%, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Patients with no-to-moderate procedural pain at maximum

  No‐to‐moderate pain was recorded in 93%, 85%, and 80% and moderately severe–to‐severe pain in 7%, 15%, and 20%, respectively

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• PGIC responders (much or very much improved) vs placebo

  increases, p = 0.1

  At weeks 12 and 16, patients achieved significant improvement with CNTX‐4975 0.5 mg versus placebo (P < 0.10)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• PGIC responders (much or very much improved) vs placebo

  increases, p = 0.1

  Improvements at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 in patients receiving the 1.0 mg dose were statistically significant at the prespecified alpha level of ≤0.1 versus placebo

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Rescue acetaminophen total dose over 12 weeks (users)

  decreases

  the mean per patient total dose during the 12 weeks was 21,006 mg in the placebo group (n = 50) compared to 13,392 mg in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group (n = 47)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Rescue-adjusted WOMAC pain with walking, AUC of change from baseline

  decreases, p = 0.01

  the reduction in rescue‐adjusted WOMAC pain with walking scores from baseline through week 12 was significantly greater with CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg versus placebo (LSMD −0.9 [90% CI −1.5, −0.3], P = 0.01; mean ± SD change −2.75 ± 2.61 versus −1.95 ± 2.16)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Rescue ibuprofen total dose (users)

  decreases

  The mean per patient total ibuprofen dose was greater in the placebo group (9,403 mg; n = 18) than in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group (7,446 mg; n = 13)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC knee stiffness, baseline score

  Baseline score, mean ± SD | 13.1 ± 3.8 | 12.9 ± 3.3 | 12.3 ± 3.8

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC knee stiffness, change from baseline (MMRM)

  decreases, p = 0.001

  The 1.0 mg dose was associated with significantly improved WOMAC knee stiffness scores (LSMD −2.5 [90% CI −3.8, −1.2], P = 0.001; mean ± SD change −6.7 ± 5.2 versus −4.8 ± 6.6)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC knee stiffness, change from baseline (MMRM)

  no effect, p = 0.14

  Numerical improvements in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group versus placebo were observed at week 24 for knee stiffness (LSMD −1.2 [90% CI −2.5, 0.1], P = 0.14; mean ± SD change −5.7 ± 5.5 versus −5.1 ± 6.2)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC knee stiffness, LSMD vs placebo (MMRM)

  no effect

  LSMD vs. placebo (90% CI) | −0.8 (−2.4, 0.8) | 0.3 (−1.4, 1.9) | −2.5 (−3.8, −1.2) e | −1.2 (−2.5, 0.1)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC knee stiffness, LSMD vs placebo (MMRM)

  no effect

  LSMD vs. placebo (90% CI) | −0.8 (−2.4, 0.8) | 0.3 (−1.4, 1.9) | −2.5 (−3.8, −1.2) e | −1.2 (−2.5, 0.1)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, AUC of change from baseline

  decreases, p = 0.07

  A smaller but significant improvement versus placebo was observed with the 0.5 mg dose (LSMD −0.8 [90% CI −1.5, −0.06], P = 0.07; mean ± SD change −3.3 ± 2.1)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, AUC of change from baseline

  no effect, p = 0.19

  but not with the CNTX‐4975 0.5 mg dose (LSMD −0.6 [90% CI −1.3, 0.15], P = 0.19; mean ± SD change −3.2 ± 1.9)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, AUC of change from baseline

  decreases, p = 0.0001

  the reduction in pain scores from baseline through week 12 was significantly greater in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group compared to placebo (LSMD −1.6 [90% CI −2.2, −1.0], P < 0.0001; mean ± SD change −4.1 ± 2.1 versus −2.6 ± 2.2)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, AUC of change from baseline

  decreases, p = 0.001

  showed significant improvements with the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg dose versus placebo (LSMD −1.4 [90% CI −1.9, −0.77], P < 0.001; mean ± SD change −3.9 ± 2.2 versus −2.7 ± 2.2)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, baseline score

  Baseline score, mean ± SD | 7.4 ± 0.9 | 7.2 ± 1.1 | 7.2 ± 1.2

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, change from baseline (MMRM)

  decreases, p = 0.09

  significant improvements in the WOMAC pain with walking score with CNTX‐4975 0.5 mg were demonstrated, compared to placebo, at week 12 (LSMD −0.9 [90% CI −1.7, −0.03], P = 0.09; mean ± SD change −3.8 ± 2.5 versus −3.0 ± 2.5)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, change from baseline (MMRM)

  no effect, p = 0.41

  but not at week 24 (LSMD −0.5 [90% CI −1.5, 0.5], P = 0.41; mean ± SD change −3.6 ± 2.0 versus −3.0 ± 2.8)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, change from baseline (MMRM)

  decreases, p = 0.001

  At the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg dose, significant divergence from placebo was evident at week 12 (LSMD −1.5 [90% CI −2.2, −0.8], P < 0.001; mean ± SD change −4.4 ± 2.6 versus −3.0 ± 2.5)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking, change from baseline (MMRM)

  decreases, p = 0.07

  and at week 24 (LSMD −0.9 [90% CI −1.6, −0.1], P = 0.07; mean ± SD change −3.3 ± 2.6 versus −3.0 ± 2.8)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking on a flat surface (single item, 0-10 scale), daily diary AUC change from baseline through week 12 and 24; WOMAC stiffness (range 0-20) and physical function (range 0-170) at week 12 and 24; single intraarticular CNTX-4975 (trans-capsaicin) 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg versus vehicle, after 2% lidocaine in all arms

  decreases, LSMD -1.6 (90% CI -2.2, -1.0) for 1.0 mg versus placebo through week 12, n = 172

  Not recorded as a finding: a node exists but the paper states a different instrument or population

  In the primary AUC efficacy analysis, the reduction in pain scores from baseline through week 12 was significantly greater in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group compared to placebo (LSMD −1.6 [90% CI −2.2, −1.0], P < 0.0001; mean ± SD change −4.1 ± 2.1 versus −2.6 ± 2.2).

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC pain with walking on a flat surface (single item QA1, range 0-10, daily recall of previous 24 h), standardized AUC of change from baseline through week 12, intraarticular trans-capsaicin CNTX-4975 1.0 mg versus vehicle placebo; WOMAC stiffness (0-20) and physical function (0-170) also reported

  decreases

  Not recorded as a finding: a node exists but the paper states a different instrument or population

  In the primary AUC efficacy analysis, the reduction in pain scores from baseline through week 12 was significantly greater in the CNTX‐4975 1.0 mg group compared to placebo (LSMD −1.6 [90% CI −2.2, −1.0], P < 0.0001; mean ± SD change −4.1 ± 2.1 versus −2.6 ± 2.2).

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC physical function, baseline score

  Baseline score, mean ± SD | 114.1 ± 24.7 | 108.4 ± 24.2 | 106.9 ± 27.9

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC physical function, change from baseline (MMRM)

  decreases, p = 0.004

  and knee function scores (LSMD −18.3 [90% CI −28.6, −7.9], P = 0.004; mean ± SD change −59.3 ± 39.8 versus −46.2 ± 46.0)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC physical function, change from baseline (MMRM)

  no effect, p = 0.28

  and for knee function (LSMD −7.2 [90% CI −18.3, 3.8], P = 0.28; mean ± SD change −51.6 ± 44.8 versus −49.4 ± 49.2)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC physical function, LSMD vs placebo (MMRM)

  no effect

  LSMD vs. placebo (90% CI) | −5.0 (−17.9, 7.9) | 4.1 (−9.7, 17.9) | −18.3 (−28.6, −7.9) h | −7.2 (−18.3, 3.8)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• WOMAC physical function, LSMD vs placebo (MMRM)

  no effect

  LSMD vs. placebo (90% CI) | −5.0 (−17.9, 7.9) | 4.1 (−9.7, 17.9) | −18.3 (−28.6, −7.9) h | −7.2 (−18.3, 3.8)

  PMID:30888737 · one of two readings recorded this

• Baseline symptom scores (abdominal burning, pain, heartburn, fullness, regurgitation, belching)

  increases, p = 0.05

  NERD patients had higher baseline symptom scores for abdominal burning, abdominal pain, heartburn, abdominal fullness, food regurgitation, and belching than healthy volunteers (p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• gastric accommodation (maximal postprandial minus fasting gastric volume after 250 mL Ensure) by SPECT with 99mTc-pertechnetate, and upper gastrointestinal symptoms on a 10-cm VAS, chili versus placebo capsules

  increases, NERD patients: gastric accommodation 451 +/- 89 vs 375 +/- 81 mL, chili vs placebo, n = 15

  Not recorded as a finding: subject_absent

  Gastric accommodation after chili ingestion was significantly increased compared to placebo ingestion in NERD patients (451 ± 89 vs. 375 ± 81 mL, p < 0.05).

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Gastric accommodation

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 15

  Gastric accommodation in healthy volunteers was not significantly different between chili and placebo ingestion (380 ± 69 vs. 388 ± 54 mL, p > 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Gastric accommodation

  increases, p = 0.05, n = 15

  Gastric accommodation after chili ingestion was significantly increased compared to placebo ingestion in NERD patients (451 ± 89 vs. 375 ± 81 mL, p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Gastric accommodation

  increases, p = 0.05

  Furthermore, gastric accommodation of NERD patients was significantly increased compared to healthy volunteers after chili ingestion (p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Gastric accommodation

  no effect, p = 0.05

  Gastric accommodation after placebo ingestion was not significantly different between NERD patients and healthy volunteers (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial abdominal burning severity

  increases, p = 0.05, n = 15

  Chili ingestion was associated with significantly higher postprandial abdominal burning symptom severity compared to the placebo in NERD patients (2.2 ± 2.5 vs. 0.3 ± 0.8; p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial early satiety severity

  decreases, p = 0.05, n = 15

  The early satiety symptom severity in NERD patients after chili ingestion was significantly less severe compared to the placebo (3.1 ± 2.7 vs. 3.9 ± 2.7; p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume after chili

  increases

  600 ± 73 vs. 526 ± 70, 576 ± 81 vs. 492 ± 78, 532 ± 81 vs. 466 ± 86 mL, NERD vs. healthy volunteers at a postprandial period of 10, 20, and 30 min

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume after chili

  increases

  600 ± 73 vs. 526 ± 70, 576 ± 81 vs. 492 ± 78, 532 ± 81 vs. 466 ± 86 mL, NERD vs. healthy volunteers at a postprandial period of 10, 20, and 30 min

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume after chili

  increases

  600 ± 73 vs. 526 ± 70, 576 ± 81 vs. 492 ± 78, 532 ± 81 vs. 466 ± 86 mL, NERD vs. healthy volunteers at a postprandial period of 10, 20, and 30 min

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume after placebo

  no effect, p = 0.05

  Although the postprandial gastric volume after placebo ingestion in NERD patients was greater than healthy volunteers, the difference did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume, chili vs placebo, all time points

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 15

  In healthy volunteers, the postprandial gastric volume after chili ingestion at each time point was not significantly different from that of placebo ingestion (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial gastric volume

  increases, p = 0.05, n = 15

  the postprandial gastric volume at 20 min after chili ingestion in NERD patients was significantly greater than placebo ingestion (p < 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Postprandial upper GI symptoms (all nine)

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 15

  were not significantly different (p > 0.05) in healthy volunteers

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• Typical reflux and other upper GI symptoms

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 15

  The typical reflux and other upper GI symptoms were not significantly different between chili and the placebo in NERD patients (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33291700 · one of two readings recorded this

• 10 km running time-trial completion time, blood lactate, peak heart rate, Borg 6-20 RPE, capsiate versus starch placebo

  no effect, CAP 45.07 +/- 6.41 min vs PLA 45.13 +/- 6.73 min, p = 0.828, n = 21

  Not recorded as a finding: subject_absent

  The 10 km time-trial performance (CAP = 45.07 ± 6.41 min vs. PLA = 45.13 ± 6.73, p = 0.828) was not statistically significantly different between conditions.

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• 10 km running time-trial time

  no effect

  Comparing the effects of CAP versus PLA conditions on 10 km running time did not reveal any significant differences between conditions

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• 10 km time, first vs second attempt (learning effect)

  no effect, p = 0.05

  No significant differences between the first and the second attempt of the 10 km runs were found (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Mean velocity change along distance (condition x distance interaction)

  no effect, p = 0.996

  There was no interaction main effect (PLA vs. CAP condition * distance) (p = 0.996)

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Peak blood lactate concentration

  no effect

  Additionally, no statistically significant differences were detected for lactate concentration, HRpeak and RPE between conditions

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Peak heart rate (HRpeak)

  no effect

  Additionally, no statistically significant differences were detected for lactate concentration, HRpeak and RPE between conditions

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Rating of perceived exertion (RPE)

  no effect

  Additionally, no statistically significant differences were detected for lactate concentration, HRpeak and RPE between conditions

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Total kilocalorie and macronutrient intake 24 h before exercise

  no effect, p = 0.05

  There was no difference between the trials for total kilocalorie and total macronutrient intake 24 h before exercise for each condition (p > 0.05)

  PMID:33374147 · one of two readings recorded this

• Anxiety after patch application

  no effect, p = 0.423

  with no significant difference between the standard and music arms (p = 0.271), or between the hypnosis and music arms (p = 0.423)

  PMID:34044838 · one of two readings recorded this

• Anxiety after patch application

  decreases, p = 0.007

  Compared to standard application, anxiety was significantly lower in the hypnosis group after application (p = 0.007)

  PMID:34044838 · one of two readings recorded this

• Anxiety after patch application

  no effect, p = 0.271

  with no significant difference between the standard and music arms (p = 0.271), or between the hypnosis and music arms (p = 0.423)

  PMID:34044838 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain and anxiety on numerical rating scales during application of a capsaicin 8% patch, hypnosis recording versus music versus standard application

  no effect, no significant difference in pain scores between hypnosis, music and standard groups, p = 0.355, n = 69

  Not recorded as a finding: another reason, stated per paper

  Overall, there was no significant difference in pain scores between groups (p = 0.355).

  PMID:34044838 · one of two readings recorded this

• Pain score during capsaicin patch application

  no effect, p = 0.355, n = 69

  Overall, there was no significant difference in pain scores between groups (p = 0.355)

  PMID:34044838 · one of two readings recorded this

• Brush allodynia score, difference in area pre to post

  increases, p = 0.001

  The difference in area of BAS between pre and post for the capsaicin group was 141.36cm2 ± 119.78 cm2, while the difference in area of BAS for the placebo group was 0.091cm2 ± 0.30 cm2 (p < 0.001, Kruskal–Wallis)

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• Motor unit recruitment difference, infraspinatus (sEMG)

  no effect, p = 0.123

  The Kruskal–Wallis H test for the difference in motor recruitment in the infraspinatus did not show any significant effects (p = 0.123) between the capsaicin and placebo groups

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• Motor unit recruitment difference, upper trapezius (sEMG)

  modulates, p = 0.033

  The independent samples t-test for the difference in motor recruitment in the trapezius showed a significant effect (p = 0.033) when comparing the capsaicin group with the placebo group

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• motor unit recruitment order by surface EMG (trapezius, infraspinatus) and motor unit variance by intramuscular EMG after 0.075% capsaicin cream versus placebo lotion

  p = 0.033

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The independent samples t-test for the difference in motor recruitment in the trapezius showed a significant effect (p = 0.033) when comparing the capsaicin group with the placebo group.

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• Motor unit variance (iEMG), post-pre difference

  modulates, p = 0.043

  Capsaicin POST–PRE versus Placebo POST–PRE | 0.043

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• Motor unit variance (iEMG), post vs pre

  no effect, p = 0.827

  Capsaicin POST versus Capsaicin PRE | 0.827

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• Motor unit variance (iEMG), post vs pre

  no effect, p = 0.333

  Placebo POST versus Placebo PRE | 0.333

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain intensity

  increases

  the average and standard deviation values of VAS for the capsaicin group were pre (0 mm ± 0 mm) and post (54.66 mm ± 18.70 mm)

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain intensity

  no effect

  while the values for the placebo group were pre (3.63 mm ± 4.71 mm) and post (7.27 mm ± 5.10 mm)

  PMID:34215800 · one of two readings recorded this

• average salivary IL-6 concentration

  increases, p = 0.009, n = 10

  CAP increased the average salivary IL-6 concentration (p = 0.009)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• correlation of potentiated twitch with time to exhaustion

  increases, p = 0.04, n = 10

  significant positive correlation with both PL (r = 0.7, p = 0.04) and CAP (r = 0.7, p = 0.04) was observed

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• correlation of potentiated twitch with time to exhaustion

  increases, p = 0.04, n = 10

  significant positive correlation with both PL (r = 0.7, p = 0.04) and CAP (r = 0.7, p = 0.04) was observed

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• deoxygenated hemoglobin during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  THC (77.5 ± 28.1 vs. 80.2 ± 30.9 μM) and Hb (36.2 ± 20.3 vs. 40.2 ± 19.4 μM) higher in the PL condition

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• deoxygenated hemoglobin during recovery

  no effect, n = 10

  [Hb] (25.4 ± 7.9 vs. 26.7 ± 9.3 μM)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• exercise-induced decline in maximal rate of force development (MRFD)

  no effect, n = 10

  MRFD decreased similarly in both conditions, namely, by 55 ± 16% and 49 ± 21% in PL and CAP, respectively

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• exercise-induced decline in maximal relaxation rate (MRR)

  decreases, n = 10

  in the PL condition, MRR was reduced by 57 ± 22%, while only attenuated by 41 ± 19% in CAP

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• exercise-induced decline in maximal relaxation rate (MRR)

  decreases, p = 0.01, n = 10

  CAP mitigated the exercise-induced decline in MRR (p = 0.01; Figure 4C)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• maximal voluntary contraction force after exercise

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  as well as after the TTE (479 ± 125 vs. 499 ± 133 N, p > 0.05)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• maximal voluntary contraction force before exercise

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  the MVCs were not different between the two conditions (640 ± 127 vs. 643 ± 161 N, p > 0.05)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• muscle microvascular oxygenation StO2 during recovery hyperemia, near-infrared spectroscopy

  increases, StO2 71.6 vs 69.5 % capsaicin vs placebo, p = 0.02, n = 10

  Not recorded as a finding: no outcome node for NIRS muscle oxygenation

  When we look at the hyperemia during recovery, CAP showed higher levels of StO2% as compared to PL (71.6 ± 1.6 vs. 69.5 ± 2.8%, p = 0.02), but there were no between-conditions differences for [THC] (90.1 ± 29.7 vs. 88.9 ± 31.8 μM), [HbO] (64.7 ± 22.0 vs. 62.3 ± 23.1 μM), and [Hb] (25.4 ± 7.9 vs. 26.7 ± 9.3 μM).

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• muscle oxygenation (StO2) during recovery hyperemia

  increases, p = 0.02, n = 10

  CAP showed higher levels of StO2% as compared to PL (71.6 ± 1.6 vs. 69.5 ± 2.8%, p = 0.02)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• oxygenated hemoglobin during recovery

  no effect, n = 10

  [HbO] (64.7 ± 22.0 vs. 62.3 ± 23.1 μM)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak cardiac output during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  With CAP, the HR peak during exercise was 180 ± 7 bpm, SV was 212 ± 48 mL/min, and CO was 36 ± 8 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak cardiac output during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  with PL the peak of HR was 181 ± 9 bpm, SV was 225 ± 49 mL/min, and CO was 38 ± 9 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak heart rate during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  With CAP, the HR peak during exercise was 180 ± 7 bpm, SV was 212 ± 48 mL/min, and CO was 36 ± 8 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak heart rate during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  with PL the peak of HR was 181 ± 9 bpm, SV was 225 ± 49 mL/min, and CO was 38 ± 9 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak stroke volume during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  With CAP, the HR peak during exercise was 180 ± 7 bpm, SV was 212 ± 48 mL/min, and CO was 36 ± 8 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• peak stroke volume during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  with PL the peak of HR was 181 ± 9 bpm, SV was 225 ± 49 mL/min, and CO was 38 ± 9 L/min

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• percentage change in post-exercise decline in Qtw,pot

  decreases, p = 0.037, n = 10

  the percentage change in post-exercise decline in Qtw,pot in the two conditions, which reached statistical significance (−52 ± 6 vs. −42 ± 11 %, p = 0.037

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• post-exercise decline in potentiated quadriceps twitch force (Qtw,pot), interpolated twitch technique

  decreases, -52 +/- 6 % placebo vs -42 +/- 11 % capsaicin, p = 0.037, n = 10

  Not recorded as a finding: no outcome node for evoked twitch force or neuromuscular fatigue by interpolated twitch

  This is also seen in the percentage change in post-exercise decline in Qtw,pot in the two conditions, which reached statistical significance (−52 ± 6 vs. −42 ± 11 %, p = 0.037, Figure 4E).

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• post-exercise rise in salivary IL-1β

  decreases, p = 0.053, n = 10

  CAP tended to attenuate the post-exercise rise in IL-1β (p = 0.053

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• potentiated resting twitch (Qtw,pot) before exercise

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  the baseline resting twitches (Qtw,pot) showed similar values (201± 64 vs. 205 ± 59 N, p > 0.05)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• potentiated resting twitch (Qtw,pot) immediately after exercise

  unclear, p = 0.07, n = 10

  greater Qtw,pot immediately following exercise in the CAP condition as compared to the PL condition (100 ± 28 vs. 116 ± 37 N, p = 0.07

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• rating of perceived exertion (whole-body and leg)

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  (RPEtot: 7.8 ± 2.2 vs. 6.9 ± 2.8; RPEleg: 9.3 ± 1.3 vs. 9.0 ± 1.1; all p > 0.05)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• salivary alpha-amylase activity

  decreases, p = 0.07, n = 10

  The activity of the salivary α-amylase tended to be reduced with CAP (p = 0.07)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• salivary cortisol kinetics at baseline, during and after exercise, ELISA

  no effect

  Not recorded as a finding: node serum-cortisol requires matrix and sampling form recorded; paper reports only 'overall kinetics' with a time main effect, not a clean between-condition contrast of a single point, awakening response or AUC

  Indeed, there was a main effect of time (p = 0.002) with an increase in salivary cortisol concentration during recovery; however, CAP did not influence the overall kinetics (p > 0.05, Table 2).

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• salivary cortisol kinetics

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  CAP did not influence the overall kinetics (p > 0.05, Table 2)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• salivary IL-6 concentration, ELISA

  increases, average salivary IL-6 higher with capsaicin at baseline and during exercise, p = 0.009, n = 10

  Not recorded as a finding: interleukin-6 node is serum or plasma immunoassay; this is whole saliva

  Looking at the interleukins, CAP increased the average salivary IL-6 concentration (p = 0.009) at baseline and during the exercise, then the level decreased to PL concentrations post-exercise.

  PMID:35057413 · both readings recorded this

• time to exhaustion at 85% peak power

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  Both placebo and capsaicin conditions showed similar exhaustion (TTE) time of 375 ± 26 and 327 ± 36 s, respectively (p > 0.05, Figure 3A)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• total hemoglobin content during exercise

  no effect, n = 10

  THC (77.5 ± 28.1 vs. 80.2 ± 30.9 μM) and Hb (36.2 ± 20.3 vs. 40.2 ± 19.4 μM) higher in the PL condition

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• total hemoglobin content during recovery

  no effect, n = 10

  [THC] (90.1 ± 29.7 vs. 88.9 ± 31.8 μM)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• voluntary muscle activation

  no effect, p = 0.05, n = 10

  VMA% was not affected by either exercise or the supplement (p > 0.05)

  PMID:35057413 · one of two readings recorded this

• association of heartburn VAS with mucosal impedance

  no effect, p = 0.08, n = 13

  (slope −0.007, P value: 0.080, 95% CI [−0.015 to 0.001])

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• association of intercellular space area with mucosal impedance

  decreases, p = 0.002, n = 12

  slope −0.001, P value 0.002, 95% CI [−0.0001 to −0.00003]

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• association of retrosternal pain VAS with mucosal impedance

  decreases, p = 0.031, n = 13

  combined (slope −0.006, P value: 0.031, 95% CI [−0.011 to −0.001])

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• heartburn intensity, 0-100 mm VAS, distal esophageal capsaicin perfusion versus saline

  increases, overall P value 0.004, p = 0.004, n = 13

  Not recorded as a finding: no outcome node for heartburn VAS; vas-pain is pain intensity, not heartburn

  Perfusion of capsaicin into the distal esophagus resulted in significantly higher scores for heartburn (overall P value 0.004) and retrosternal pain (overall P value 0.047) over time.

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• heartburn VAS score over time

  increases, p = 0.004, n = 13

  Perfusion of capsaicin into the distal esophagus resulted in significantly higher scores for heartburn (overall P value 0.004) and retrosternal pain (overall P value 0.047) over time

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• intercellular space area, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.171, n = 12

  The intercellular space area was not significantly different between the type of solution in the proximal (P value 0.330) and distal esophagus (P value 0.171)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• intercellular space area, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.33, n = 12

  The intercellular space area was not significantly different between the type of solution in the proximal (P value 0.330) and distal esophagus (P value 0.171)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance before perfusion, test day 1 vs 2

  no effect, p = 0.369, n = 13

  Mucosal impedance before the start of the perfusion on both test days was not significantly different (P value 0.369)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, distal esophagus

  decreases, n = 13

  a significant difference in recovery of 966 Ω

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, distal esophagus

  decreases, n = 13

  capsaicin preperfusion and postperfusion: 3,468 [257] Ω and 3,313 [277] Ω

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, distal esophagus

  increases, p = 0.027, n = 13

  saline preperfusion and postperfusion: 2,918 [261] Ω and 3,728 [266] Ω, P value for difference in change scores 0.027

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, proximal esophagus

  decreases, n = 13

  This difference in recovery was 1,139 Ω

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, proximal esophagus

  no effect, n = 13

  capsaicin preperfusion and postperfusion: 3,017 [294] Ω and 3,047 [310] Ω

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• mucosal impedance pre- and postperfusion, proximal esophagus

  increases, p = 0.007, n = 13

  saline preperfusion and postperfusion: 2,329 [294] Ω and 3,497 [301] Ω, P value for difference in change scores 0.007

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• retrosternal pain and heartburn VAS 0-100 mm during and after distal esophageal capsaicin perfusion versus saline; esophageal mucosal impedance, intercellular space area, TRPV1 immunohistochemistry and mRNA

  increases, p = 0.047, n = 13

  Not recorded as a finding: a node exists but the paper states a different instrument or population

  Perfusion of capsaicin into the distal esophagus resulted in significantly higher scores for heartburn (overall P value 0.004) and retrosternal pain (overall P value 0.047) over time.

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• retrosternal pain VAS score over time

  increases, p = 0.047, n = 13

  Perfusion of capsaicin into the distal esophagus resulted in significantly higher scores for heartburn (overall P value 0.004) and retrosternal pain (overall P value 0.047) over time

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• TRPV1 immunohistochemistry H-score, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.97, n = 12

  There was no significant difference in H-scores for TRPV1 between the type of solution after correction for location (distal P value 0.970 and proximal P value 0.761)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• TRPV1 immunohistochemistry H-score, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.761, n = 12

  There was no significant difference in H-scores for TRPV1 between the type of solution after correction for location (distal P value 0.970 and proximal P value 0.761)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• TRPV1 mRNA level, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.829, n = 12

  There was no significant difference in TRPV1 mRNA levels between the type of solution after correction for location (distal P value 0.829 and proximal P value 0.186)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• TRPV1 mRNA level, capsaicin vs saline

  no effect, p = 0.186, n = 12

  There was no significant difference in TRPV1 mRNA levels between the type of solution after correction for location (distal P value 0.829 and proximal P value 0.186)

  PMID:35351835 · one of two readings recorded this

• area of capsaicin-induced flare

  no effect, p = 0.565, n = 20

  F (1, 190) = 0.3324; 95% CI for the difference, − 4.3 to 3.1 cm2; p = 0.5650

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• area of dynamic mechanical allodynia

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 20

  (24.5 ± 13.6 cm2) was significantly smaller than that in the placebo group (40.0 ± 18.8 cm2) (F (1, 190) = 14.2152; 95% CI for the difference, − 26.0 to − 5.0 cm2; p < 0.001

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• area of punctate mechanical hyperalgesia

  no effect, p = 0.1052, n = 10

  (41.1 ± 21.3 cm2) was slightly smaller than that in the placebo group (55.6 ± 34.4 cm2), but the difference was not statistically significant (F (1, 90) = 2.6792; 95% CI for the difference, − 41.4 to 12.3 cm2; p = 0.1052

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• capsaicin-induced spontaneous pain

  no effect, p = 0.7479, n = 20

  33.5 ± 6.7 (mean ± standard deviation) vs. 34.4 ± 9.2 mm; F (1, 342) = 0.1035; 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference, − 6.1 to 4.3 mm; p = 0.7479

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• heart rate after three doses

  decreases, p = 0.0043, n = 20

  ivabradine group (58.2 ± 4.7 bpm) and placebo group (65.3 ± 8.2 bpm) (95% CI for the difference, − 11.4 to − 2.9 bpm; p = 0.0043

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• heart rate before first study drug

  no effect, p = 0.7395, n = 20

  ivabradine group (68.5 ± 8.0 beat per minute (bpm)) and placebo group (67.7 ± 9.2 bpm) (95% CI for the difference, − 4.7 to 6.4 bpm; p = 0.7395

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

• heat-pain threshold after capsaicin

  no effect, p = 0.7501, n = 20

  F (1, 190) = 0.1017; 95% CI for the difference, − 1.0 to 1.4 °C; p = 0.7501

  PMID:36241872 · one of two readings recorded this

The whole record — 421 rows