Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28215182›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2017

Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain.

Mette Frahm Olsen, Eik Bjerre, Maria Damkjær Hansen, Jørgen Hilden, Nino Emanuel Landler, Britta Tendal, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 207 papers, 36 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
207citing papers in PubMed, 36 pooled it
19.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT06187428 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The PainSMART Project: A Research Program on Effectiveness, Mechanisms of Effect and Patient-practitioner Experiences of the PainSMART-strategy as an Adjunct to Usual Primary Care Physiotherapy Management for Musculoskeletal Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorKajsa JohanssonRan2024 to 2025Enrolled494ConditionsPain, Pain Acute, Pain, Chronic, Self EfficacyArmsPainSMART-strategy, Usual physiotherapy management
NCT07744503 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Intraarticular Application of Local Anesthetics Versus Peripheral Regional Anesthesia in Patients With Total Arthroplasty of the Knee (K-TEP)

TypeinterventionalSponsorChristopher MaleRan2025 to 2026Enrolled78ConditionsPain, Postoperative, Osteoarthritis, Knee, Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeArmsContinuous Femoral and Sciatic Nerve Block (Ropivacaine), Local Infiltration Analgesia (Ropivacaine, Ketorolac, Epinephrine)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

207 citing papers in PubMed, 36 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 474 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Post-thyroidectomy bilateral cervical plexus block relieves pain: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

147 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mette Frahm OlsenNordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, Department 7811, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5742-6403
Eik BjerreUniversity Hospitals' Centre for Health Research (UCSF), Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, Department 9701, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Maria Damkjær HansenFrederiksberg Hospital, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Jørgen HildenSection of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Østre Farigmagsgade 5, 114, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Nino Emanuel LandlerDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte Hospital, Kildegårdsvej 28, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Britta TendalNordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, Department 7811, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Asbjørn HróbjartssonCentre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Southern Denmark & Odense University Hospital, Sdr. Boulevard 29, Gate 50 (Videncenteret), 5000, Odense C, Denmark. Asbjorn.Hrobjartsson@rsyd.dk.
Rigshospitalet · DKFrederiksberg Hospital · DKGentofte Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is used to interpret the clinical relevance of results reported by trials and meta-analyses as well as to plan sample sizes in new studies. However, there is a lack of consensus about the size of MCID in acute pain, which is a core symptom affecting patients across many clinical conditions.

methodsWe identified and systematically reviewed empirical studies of MCID in acute pain. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, and included prospective studies determining MCID using a patient-reported anchor and a one-dimensional pain scale (e.g. 100 mm visual analogue scale). We summarised results and explored reasons for heterogeneity applying meta-regression, subgroup analyses and individual patient data meta-analyses.

resultsWe included 37 studies (8479 patients). Thirty-five studies used a mean change approach, i.e. MCID was assessed as the mean difference in pain score among patients who reported a minimum degree of improvement, while seven studies used a threshold approach, i.e. MCID was assessed as the threshold in pain reduction associated with the best accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) for identifying improved patients. Meta-analyses found considerable heterogeneity between studies (absolute MCID: I

conclusionsThe MCID in acute pain varied greatly between studies and was influenced by baseline pain, definitions of improved patients and study design. MCID is context-specific and potentially misguiding if determined, applied or interpreted inappropriately. Explicit and conscientious reflections on the choice of a reference value are required when using MCID to classify research results as clinically important or trivial.

Indexed as

Acute PainAdolescentAdultAgedDisability EvaluationHumansMiddle AgedPain ManagementYoung AdultMinimum clinically important differencePainSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28215182
PMCPMC5317055
OpenAlexW2586327237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.