Pregabalin vs active comparators: Withdrawals due to adverse events
- Population
- people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy
- Intervention
- Pregabalin
- Comparison
- active comparators
- Outcome
- Withdrawals due to adverse events
Pregabalin showed no clear difference in treatment withdrawal for adverse events compared with active comparators (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pregabalin vs active comparators Treatment withdrawal for adverse events · drug‐resistant focal epilepsy Pregabalin add‐on for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | 1.04 [0.73, 1.48] | 3 studies · 1286 participants | Low |
Pregabalin vs active comparators Treatment withdrawal for adverse events · drug‐resistant focal epilepsy Pregabalin showed no clear difference in treatment withdrawal for adverse events compared with active comparators (low certainty). Pregabalin add‐on for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD005612.PUB4, superseded | RR 1.04 [0.73, 1.48] | 3 studies · 1286 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pregabalin add‐on for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Pregabalin vs placebo · people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy · 1 review
- Pregabalin vs placebo · adults with fibromyalgia · 1 review
- Pregabalin vs placebo at end of treatment · patients with fibromyalgia · 1 review
- Pregabalin vs placebo · children and adolescents with chronic non‐cancer pain · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.