Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25869349›Full record

SynthesisRheumatology international2015

How is the experience of pain measured in older, community-dwelling people with osteoarthritis? A systematic review of the literature.

Katie de Luca, Lynne Parkinson, Henry Pollard, Julie Byles, Fiona Blyth

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Rheumatology international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Katie de LucaResearch Centre for Gender Health and Ageing, University of Newcastle, 18 Palm Court South West Rocks, Callaghan, NSW, 2431, Australia, chirokatie@live.com.au.
Lynne Parkinson
Henry Pollard
Julie Byles
Fiona Blyth

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of the study was to perform a systematic review to identify and appraise outcome measures and measures of pain that are used to assess the experience of pain by older people with osteoarthritis, and to assess whether these measures are effective at capturing the multidimensional nature of the experience of this pain. A systematic review of five electronic databases from January 1996 to March 2013 was done. Inclusion criteria were cohort/observational and cross-sectional studies; specific diagnosis of OA; employed outcome measures of pain and/or health and/or quality of life which included questions about pain; and considered older adults. Articles were reviewed for methodological quality using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A total of 14 publications met the inclusion criteria, and 11 discrete studies were included in the review. The studies used 21 different outcome measures, utilizing 13 measures of pain. Sensory, affective and cognitive dimensions of pain were captured by the measures, albeit studies predominantly measured intensity or severity alone. Measures of pain used in epidemiological studies do not adequately capture the multidimensional nature of the experience of pain in osteoarthritis. There is a fraught complexity in the multidimensionality of the experience of pain in osteoarthritis, and studies exploring osteoarthritis pain in older people should attempt to capture this multidimensionality by employing multiple valid and reliable outcome measures that capture specific dimensions of the pain experience.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAgedAged, 80 and overHumansOsteoarthritisPainPain Measurement

Identifiers

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.