ArticleBritish journal of pain2020
'You wouldn't do that to an animal, would you?' Ethical issues in managing pain in patients with substance dependence.
Article in British journal of pain, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nurses' Experiences of Pain Management for Patients With Diagnosed Mental Health Conditions: A Systematic Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Reconstructing Al-Farabi's ethical framework in contemporary bioethics: genetics, reproduction, and technological challenges.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026Article
- Ethical Challenges of Acute Pain Management: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Exploring the value and acceptability of a patient navigator program for people who inject drugs and are hospitalized for bacterial infections: patients', community organization and healthcare workers' perspectives.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this article, we present a secondary analysis of a descriptive phenomenological study that we conducted in the United Kingdom exploring nurses' experiences of working with patients with substance dependence and pain. Our aim was to focus upon the ethical issues that emerged in the empirical data and so we used the Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics plus attention to scope to guide and inform our analysis. We present six key themes: trust, paternalism, coercion, failure to respect autonomy, advocacy and withholding. We discuss how these themes intersect with the four principles plus scope to illuminate practice and the ethical issues that emerge when managing this patient population's pain. We recommend that clinicians adopt a collaborative approach to managing pain for patients with substance dependence that they remain aware of the power differentials inherent within the clinical setting and ensure that communication and teamwork remain at the forefront of decisions. Clinicians need access to ethical guidance to inform their practice decisions and clinical ethics support services could provide one solution.
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.