ArticleBritish journal of pain2020
An evaluation of a digital pain management programme: clinical effectiveness and cost savings.
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 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- [Cognitive-Behavioral therapy for patients with disability associated with chronic pain: systematic review of clinical trials]Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2025Pooled it
- Engagement in Digital Self-management Interventions for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review.The Clinical journal of pain · 2025Pooled it
- HOPE for Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder (HSD)-A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of Feasibility, Acceptability and Appropriateness.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Moving pain management programmes into the digital age: development and evaluation of an online PMP for people with chronic pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Smartphone Applications Designed to Improve Older People's Chronic Pain Management: An Integrated Systematic Review.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic pain is one of the most prevalent causes of disability worldwide, and digital interventions may be one of the ways to meet this need. Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that digital interventions can be effective in treating chronic pain. This study aimed to establish the clinical effectiveness of a web-based pain management programme (PMP), specifically whether it would lead to improved clinical outcomes and reduced health care costs in a real-world clinical setting.
methodsOf 738 participants, 438 engaged with the programme and 300 did not. Two analyses were conducted: a within-subjects pre-post comparison of clinical outcomes for participants who completed the programme and a between-groups comparison of health care usage for those who engaged and those who did not.
resultsParticipants who completed the programme made significant improvements with regard to their perceived health status, level of disability, mood, confidence managing pain, problems in life due to pain and level of pain. Around one-third of participants made reliable changes in their levels of disability, depression and anxiety. There was no relationship between gender or age and engagement with the programme. Those who engaged with the programme demonstrated reduced health care costs in the year following referral, whereas health care costs of non-engagers increased. Limitations of the study include a high drop-out rate and a non-randomised comparison group. Results must therefore be interpreted with some caution.
conclusionA web-based pain management programme can be clinically effective and may be a useful addition to the treatments offered by pain management services.
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.