ArticleThe journal of pain
Improving Study Conduct and Data Quality in Clinical Trials of Chronic Pain Treatments: IMMPACT Recommendations.
Article in The journal of pain. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- sEMG Biofeedback for Episodic Migraines: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2024Trial
- Effects of a Mind-Body Program for Chronic Pain in Older versus Younger Adults.Journal of pain research · 2023Trial
- Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of a Mind-Body Activity Program for Older Adults With Chronic Pain and Cognitive Decline: The Virtual "Active Brains" Study.The Gerontologist · 2022Trial
- "Practice Makes Perfect"? Associations Between Home Practice and Physical and Emotional Function Outcomes Among Patients with Chronic Pain Enrolled in a Mind-Body Program.Journal of integrative and complementary medicine · 2022Trial
- The ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments, part II: mitigating bias, maximizing value.Pain reportsTrial
- Trial
- Daily perceived change among patients with chronic pain: influence of sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Achieving two-part harmony: standardizing pain-related phenotypes and outcomes.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Advancing Pain Understanding and Drug Discovery: Insights from Preclinical Models and Recent Research Findings.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Multiply robust estimators in longitudinal studies with missing data under control-based imputation.Biometrics · 2024Article
- SOMAScience: A Novel Platform for Multidimensional, Longitudinal Pain Assessment.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
- Optimizing and Accelerating the Development of Precision Pain Treatments for Chronic Pain: IMMPACT Review and Recommendations.The journal of pain · 2023Review
- Nonopioid analgesics discovery and the Valley of Death: EMA401 from concept to clinical trial.Pain · 2022Article
- Article
- Great Expectations: recommendations for improving the methodological rigor of psychedelic clinical trials.Psychopharmacology · 2022Review
- Getting Active Mindfully: Rationale and Case Illustration of a Group Mind-body and Activity Program for Chronic Pain.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2021Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of using smartphone-based EMA to assess patterns of prescription opioid and medical cannabis use among individuals with chronic pain.Internet interventions · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
39 authors at 20 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The estimated probability of progressing from phase 3 analgesic clinical trials to regulatory approval is approximately 57%, suggesting that a considerable number of treatments with phase 2 trial results deemed sufficiently successful to progress to phase 3 do not yield positive phase 3 results. Deficiencies in the quality of clinical trial conduct could account for some of this failure. An Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials meeting was convened to identify potential areas for improvement in trial conduct in order to improve assay sensitivity (ie, ability of trials to detect a true treatment effect). We present recommendations based on presentations and discussions at the meeting, literature reviews, and iterative revisions of this article. The recommendations relate to the following areas: 1) study design (ie, to promote feasibility), 2) site selection and staff training, 3) participant selection and training, 4) treatment adherence, 5) data collection, and 6) data and study monitoring. Implementation of these recommendations may improve the quality of clinical trial data and thus the validity and assay sensitivity of clinical trials. Future research regarding the effects of these strategies will help identify the most efficient use of resources for conducting high quality clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Every effort should be made to optimize the quality of clinical trial data. This manuscript discusses considerations to improve conduct of pain clinical trials based on research in multiple medical fields and the expert consensus of pain researchers and stakeholders from academia, regulatory agencies, and industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.