Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24085650›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2013

Optimal patient education for cancer pain: a systematic review and theory-based meta-analysis.

N Marie, T Luckett, P M Davidson, M Lovell, S Lal

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Palliative Care for Cancer Survivors.The Medical clinics of North America · 2017
    Review
  17. Psychological and behavioral approaches to cancer pain management.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2014
    Review
  18. Complementary and alternative medicine for cancer pain: an overview of systematic reviews.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2014
    Review
  19. Editorial Special Issue: Pain Management.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing
    Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

N MarieSchool of Medical and Molecular Biosciences, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia, natalie.marie@uts.edu.au.
T Luckett
P M Davidson
M Lovell
S Lal
University of Technology Sydney · AUGreenwich Hospital · USUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious systematic reviews have found patient education to be moderately efficacious in decreasing the intensity of cancer pain, but variation in results warrants analysis aimed at identifying which strategies are optimal.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken using a theory-based approach to classifying and comparing educational interventions for cancer pain. The reference lists of previous reviews and MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL were searched in May 2012. Studies had to be published in a peer-reviewed English language journal and compare the effect on cancer pain intensity of education with usual care. Meta-analyses used standardized effect sizes (ES) and a random effects model. Subgroup analyses compared intervention components categorized using the Michie et al. (Implement Sci 6:42, 2011) capability, opportunity, and motivation behavior (COM-B) model.

resultsFifteen randomized controlled trials met the criteria. As expected, meta-analysis identified a small-moderate ES favoring education versus usual care (ES, 0.27 [-0.47, -0.07]; P = 0.007) with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 71 %). Subgroup analyses based on the taxonomy found that interventions using "enablement" were efficacious (ES, 0.35 [-0.63, -0.08]; P = 0.01), whereas those lacking this component were not (ES, 0.18 [-0.46, 0.10]; P = 0.20). However, the subgroup effect was nonsignificant (P = 0.39), and heterogeneity was not reduced. Factoring in the variable of individualized versus non-individualized influenced neither efficacy nor heterogeneity.

conclusionsThe current meta-analysis follows a trend in using theory to understand the mechanisms of complex interventions. We suggest that future efforts focus on interventions that target patient self-efficacy. Authors are encouraged to report comprehensive details of interventions and methods to inform synthesis, replication, and refinement.

Indexed as

HumansNeoplasmsPainPain ManagementPatient Education as Topic

Identifiers

PMID24085650
OpenAlexW2070447280

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.