MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011917308 · doi:10.2147/jpr.s4989

Tapentadol immediate release: a new treatment option for acute pain management

2010· article· en· W2011917308 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Afilalo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTapentadolMedicineOxycodoneNauseaOpioidAnesthesiaVomitingAnalgesicInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The undertreatment of acute pain is common in many health care settings. Insufficient management of acute pain may lead to poor patient outcomes and potentially life-threatening complications. Opioids provide relief of moderate to severe acute pain; however, therapy with pure μ-opioid agonists is often limited by the prevalence of side effects, particularly opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. Tapentadol is a novel, centrally acting analgesic with 2 mechanisms of action, μ-opioid receptor agonism and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. The analgesic effects of tapentadol are independent of metabolic activation and tapentadol has no active metabolites; therefore, in theory, tapentadol may be associated with a low potential for interindividual efficacy variations and drug-drug interactions. Previous phase 3 trials in patients with various types of moderate to severe acute pain have shown that tapentadol immediate release (IR; 50 to 100 mg every 4 to 6 hours) provides analgesia comparable to that provided by the pure μ-opioid agonist comparator, oxycodone HCl IR (10 or 15 mg every 4 to 6 hours), with a lower incidence of nausea, vomiting, and constipation. Findings suggest tapentadol may represent an improved treatment option for acute pain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pain ResearchSame topicPain Management and Opioid UseFrench-language works237,207