Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Acute pain: a multifaceted challenge – the role of nimesulide

Open access
Kress, H.G., Baltov, A., Basiński, A., Berghea, F., Castellsague, J., Codreanu, C., Copaciu, E., Giamberardino, M.A., Hakl, M., Hrazdira, L., Kokavec, M., Lejčko, J., Nachtnebl, L., Stančík, R., Švec, A., Tóth, T., Vlaskovska, M.V., Woroń, J.·2016·Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the outcome from an international consensus meeting, which took place in Vienna on 4 November 2014. SCOPE: The aim of the meeting was to provide the state of the art on the pathophysiology and treatment of acute pain with special emphasis on nimesulide, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) indicated for the treatment of acute pain and primary dysmenorrhea. Besides the data on the mechanisms of acute inflammatory pain and on the efficacy and safety of nimesulide in patients affected by different forms of acute pain, the clinical experience of attending experts was discussed based on selected case reports. RESULTS: The members of this consensus group recognized that nimesulide is a NSAID highly effective in the treatment of several painful situations with an acute inflammatory component including primary dysmenorrhea. Although safety concerns regarding nimesulide have emerged in recent years, both robust new epidemiological data and clinical experience confirm a positive benefit/risk profile of nimesulide in the treatment of several forms of acute pain. CONCLUSIONS: The members of this international consensus group concluded that nimesulide, when used appropriately, remains a particularly valuable and safe option for the treatment of several conditions characterized by the presence of acute inflammatory pain because of the rapid onset of the analgesic action, and the positive evidence-based benefit/risk profile.

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 · 10.1185/03007995.2015.1100986

Cites

54 of 54 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

Cites

Show all 54 references

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Kress, H. G., Baltov, A., Basiński, A., Berghea, F., Castellsague, J., Codreanu, C., Copaciu, E., Giamberardino, M. A., Hakl, M., Hrazdira, L., Kokavec, M., Lejčko, J., Nachtnebl, L., Stančík, R., Švec, A., Tóth, T., Vlaskovska, M. V., & Woroń, J.
Venue
Current Medical Research and Opinion
Published
2015-10-15
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
23-36
ISSN
  • 0300-7995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4877
OpenAlex
W2264694598
Cited by
316
References
54
FWCI
3.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Acute pain: a multifaceted challenge – the role of nimesulide. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1185/03007995.2015.1100986
The paper
Kress, H. G., Baltov, A., Basiński, A., Berghea, F., Castellsague, J., Codreanu, C., Copaciu, E., Giamberardino, M. A., Hakl, M., Hrazdira, L., Kokavec, M., Lejčko, J., Nachtnebl, L., Stančík, R., Švec, A., Tóth, T., Vlaskovska, M. V., & Woroń, J. (2016). Acute pain: a multifaceted challenge – the role of nimesulide. Current Medical Research and Opinion. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2015.1100986

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.