Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23248811›Full record

ReviewPain research & management

Complex regional pain syndrome in children: asking the right questions.

Kenneth R Goldschneider

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pain research & management. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kenneth R GoldschneiderCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA. kenneth.goldschneider@cchmc.org
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComplex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a painful disorder without a known unifying mechanism. There are little data on which to base evaluation and treatment decisions, and what data are available come from studies involving adults; however, even that literature is relatively sparse. Developing robust research for CRPS in children is essential for the progress toward optimal treatment.

objectivesTo determine potential avenues of research in pediatric CRPS based on a review of the literature. Areas of concern include diagnostic criteria, peripheral mechanisms, central nervous system mechanisms, the role of the autonomic nervous system, possible risk factors, options for prevention and potential avenues of treatment.

methodsA literature review was performed and the results applied to form the hypotheses posited in the form of research questions. RESULTS AND

conclusionsCRPS is a complicated entity that is more than a painful sensory condition. There is evidence for peripheral inflammatory and neurological changes, and reorganization in both sensory and motor cortexes. In addition, a significant motor component is frequently observed and there appear to be tangible risk factors. Many of these pieces of evidence suggest options for prevention, treatment and monitoring progress and outcome. Most of the data are derived from adult studies and need to be replicated in children. Furthermore, there may be factors unique to pediatrics due to developmental changes in neuroplasticity as well as somatic, endocrinological and emotional growth. Some of these developmental factors may shed light on the adult condition.

Indexed as

Pain MeasurementPediatricsChildChild, PreschoolComplex Regional Pain SyndromesHumans

Identifiers

PMID23248811
PMCPMC3659012
OpenAlexW2200698289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.