Trial reportThe journal of pain2012
Comparative responsiveness of pain measures in cancer patients.
Trial report in The journal of pain, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stepped collaborative care for pain and posttraumatic stress disorder after major trauma: a randomized controlled feasibility trial.Disability and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- Improving well-being for individuals with persistent pain after surgery for breast cancer, lobular carcinoma in situ, or ductal carcinoma in situ: A randomized clinical trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Trial
- Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms, Brief Pain Inventory, PEG, and SF-36 Bodily Pain Subscale.Medical care · 2016Trial
- Pain and Cognitive Concerns Among Breast Cancer Survivors: The Mediating Role of Substance Use Coping.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Minimally important difference and responsiveness to change for numerical rating scale of menstrual pain severity: a psychometric study.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparable Minimally Important Differences and Responsiveness of Brief Pain Inventory and PEG Pain Scales across 6 Trials.The journal of pain · 2024Article
- The design and baseline characteristics for the HOPE Consortium Trial to reduce pain and opioid use in hemodialysis.Contemporary clinical trials · 2024Article
- Predictors and Consequences of Cancer and Non-Cancer-Related Pain in Those Diagnosed with Primary and Metastatic Cancers.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Article
- Pain and Other Neurological Symptoms Are Present at 3 Months After Hospitalization in COVID-19 Patients.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Pain Squad+ smartphone app to support real-time pain treatment for adolescents with cancer: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms With Legacy Pain Measures: Results From Three Randomized Clinical Trials.The journal of pain · 2019Article
- Willingness to Participate in Longitudinal Research Among People with Chronic Pain Who Take Medical Cannabis: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Cannabis and cannabinoid research · 2018Article
- Health-related quality of life in intensive care survivors: Associations with social support, comorbidity, and pain interference.PloS one · 2018Article
- Article
- Establishing a common metric for self-reported pain: linking BPI Pain Interference and SF-36 Bodily Pain Subscale scores to the PROMIS Pain Interference metric.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2015Article
- Pragmatic characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures are important for use in clinical practice.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledBrief measures to assess and monitor pain in cancer patients are available, but few head-to-head psychometric comparisons of different measures have been reported. Baseline and 3-month data were analyzed from 274 patients enrolled in the Indiana Cancer Pain and Depression (INCPAD) trial. Participants completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the PEG (a 3-item abbreviated version of the BPI), the short form (SF)-36 pain scale, and a pain global rating of change measure. The global rating was used as the criterion for standardized response mean and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses. To assess responsiveness to the trial intervention, we evaluated standardized effect size statistics stratified by trial arm. All measures were responsive to global improvement, discriminated between participants with and without improvement, and detected a significant intervention treatment effect. Short and longer measures were similarly responsive. Also, composite measures that combined pain severity and interference into a single score (BPI total, PEG, SF-36 pain) performed comparably to separate measures of each domain (BPI severity and BPI interference). PERSPECTIVE: Pain measures as brief as 2 or 3 items that provide a single score are responsive in patients with cancer-related pain. Ultra-brief measures offer a valid and efficient means of assessing and monitoring pain for the clinical management as well as research of cancer-related pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.