Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 880

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

EFNS guidelines on pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain

Attal, N., Cruccu, G., Haanpää, M., Hansson, P., Jensen, T. S., Nurmikko, T., Sampaio, C., Sindrup, S., Wiffen, P.·2006·European Journal of Neurology

Abstract

Neuropathic pain treatment remains unsatisfactory despite a substantial increase in the number of trials. This EFNS Task Force aimed at evaluating the existing evidence about the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Studies were identified using first the Cochrane Database then Medline. Trials were classified according to the aetiological condition. All class I and II controlled trials (according to EFNS classification of evidence) were assessed, but lower‐class studies were considered in conditions that had no top level studies. Only treatments feasible in an outpatient setting were evaluated. Effects on pain symptoms/signs, quality of life and comorbidities were particularly searched for. Most of the randomized controlled trials included patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and painful polyneuropathies (PPN) mainly caused by diabetes. These trials provide level A evidence for the efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants, gabapentin, pregabalin and opioids, with a large number of class I trials, followed by topical lidocaine (in PHN) and the newer antidepressants venlafaxine and duloxetine (in PPN). A small number of controlled trials were performed in central pain, trigeminal neuralgia, other peripheral neuropathic pain states and multiple‐aetiology neuropathic pains. The main peripheral pain conditions respond similarly well to tricyclic antidepressants, gabapentin, and pregabalin, but some conditions, such as HIV‐associated polyneuropathy, are more refractory. There are too few studies on central pain, combination therapy, and head‐to‐head comparison. For future trials, we recommend to assess quality of life and pain symptoms or signs with standardized tools.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01511.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 880

Metadata

Authors
Attal, N., Cruccu, G., Haanpää, M., Hansson, P., Jensen, T. S., Nurmikko, T., Sampaio, C., Sindrup, S., & Wiffen, P.
Venue
European Journal of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-10-13
Volume
13
Issue
11
Pages
1153-1169
ISSN
  • 1351-5101 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-1331
OpenAlex
W2138676765
Cited by
880
References
2
FWCI
44.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: EFNS guidelines on pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01511.x
The paper
Attal, N., Cruccu, G., Haanpää, M., Hansson, P., Jensen, T. S., Nurmikko, T., Sampaio, C., Sindrup, S., & Wiffen, P. (2006). EFNS guidelines on pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. European Journal of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01511.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.