Trial reportLasers in medical science2026
Effect of photobiomodulation on trapezius myofascial pain: a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the effect of 16 J of 808 nm low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain in individuals with trapezius trigger points (TPs). Randomized, double-blind, controlled trial conducted with 52 adults (≥ 18 years) with chronic trapezius pain and TPs. Participants were assigned to the LLLT group (808 nm, 16 J per TP) or the sham group (same protocol without emission). Both received eight sessions over four weeks. Outcomes included pain perception, number of TPs, cervical function, skin temperature, global perceived effect, and adverse events. Randomization was concealed from evaluators and participants. Repeated measures ANOVA (SPSS 21) was used for analysis. No significant differences were found between groups for pain [F(2,100) = 1.21; p = 0.30, η2 = 0.024], TPs [F(1.09,54.27) = 0.35; p = 0.57, η2 = 0.007], cervical skin temperature [F(1.79,89.65) = 0.79; p = 0.45, η2 = 0.042], trapezius temperature [F(2,100) = 1.09; p = 0.34, η2 = 0.021], or global perceived effect [F(1.44) = 1.91; p = 0.17, η2 = 0.029]. Cervical function improved significantly in the LLLT group [F(1.36,67.73) = 3.75; p = 0.04, η2 = 0.070]. Adverse effects were mild and infrequent, mainly warmth. Both groups reported clinically relevant pain reduction. LLLT at 16 J per TP with 808 nm was not superior to placebo for pain, TP count, or skin temperature. However, it improved cervical function, suggesting a functional benefit. Registration: july 18, 2022 on the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC - RBR-10m474jv).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.