Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27088013›Full record

ArticlePain research and treatment2016

Cost-Saving Early Diagnosis of Functional Pain in Nonmalignant Pain: A Noninferiority Study of Diagnostic Accuracy.

Rafael J A Cámara, Christian Merz, Barbara Wegmann, Stefanie Stauber, Roland von Känel, Niklaus Egloff

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rafael J A CámaraUniversity Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Obere Zahlbacher Straße 69, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Christian MerzDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Division of Psychosomatic Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Barbara WegmannDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Division of Psychosomatic Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0024-4502
Stefanie StauberHeart Failure and Transplantation, Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7116-0891
Roland von KänelDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, Clinic Barmelweid, 5017 Barmelweid, Switzerland; Department of Neurology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Niklaus EgloffDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Division of Psychosomatic Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Bern · CHJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives. We compared two index screening tests for early diagnosis of functional pain: pressure pain measurement by electronic diagnostic equipment, which is accurate but too specialized for primary health care, versus peg testing, which is cost-saving and more easily manageable but of unknown sensitivity and specificity. Early distinction of functional (altered pain perception; nervous sensitization) from neuropathic or nociceptive pain improves pain management. Methods. Clinicians blinded for the index screening tests assessed the reference standard of this noninferiority diagnostic accuracy study, namely, comprehensive medical history taking with all previous findings and treatment outcomes. All consenting patients referred to a university hospital for nonmalignant musculoskeletal pain participated. The main analysis compared the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of both index screening tests. Results. The area under the ROC curve for peg testing was not inferior to that of electronic equipment: it was at least 95% as large for finger measures (two-sided p = 0.038) and at least equally as large for ear measures (two-sided p = 0.003). Conclusions. Routine diagnostic testing by peg, which is accessible for general practitioners, is at least as accurate as specialized equipment. This may shorten time-to-treatment in general practices, thereby improving the prognosis and quality of life.

Identifiers

PMID27088013
PMCPMC4819101
OpenAlexW2300581296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.