↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Pregabalin for essential tremor

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

11 X users
2 Wikipedia pages


7 Dimensions

Readers on

112 Mendeley
Pregabalin for essential tremor
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009682.pub2
Pubmed ID

Elisa Bruno, Alessandra Nicoletti, Graziella Quattrocchi, Graziella Filippini, Carlo Colosimo, Mario Zappia


Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders. Treatment primarily consists of pharmacological agents. While primidone and propranolol are well-established treatments in clinical practice, they may be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients and can produce serious adverse events in a large percentage of them. For these reasons, it is worth evaluating the treatment alternatives for essential tremor. Some specialists have suggested that pregabalin could be a potentially useful agent, but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety. To assess the effects of pregabalin versus placebo or other treatment for essential tremor in adults. We performed a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials up to December 2015. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of pregabalin versus placebo or any other treatments. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in patients presenting secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes. Two reviewers independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias of the body of evidence, and we used inverse variance methods to analyse continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared the mean difference between treatment groups, and we combined results for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel methods and risk differences We used Review Manager software for data management and analysis. We only found one study eligible for this review (22 participants). We assessed the risk of bias for most domains as unclear. We graded the overall quality of evidence as very low. Compared to placebo, patients treated with pregabalin showed no significant improvement of motor tasks on the 36-point subscale of the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS) (MD -2.15 points; 95% CI -9.16 to 4.86) or on the 32-point functional abilities subscale of the TRS (MD -0.66 points; 95% CI -2.90 to 1.58).The limited evidence showed no difference in study withdrawal (Mantel-Haenszel RD -0.09; 95% CI -0.48 to 0.30) and presentation of adverse events between pregabalin and placebo (Mantel-Haenszel RD 0.18; 95% CI -0.13 to 0.50). The effects of pregabalin for treating essential tremor are uncertain because the quality of the evidence is very low. One small study did not highlight any effect of this treatment; however, the high risk of bias and the lack of other studies on this topic limit further conclusion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Other 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 46 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Unspecified 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 50 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2021.
All research outputs
of 25,380,192 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 12,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 322,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,380,192 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,620 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.8. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.