ArticleJAMA network open2021
Evaluation of a Chronic Pain Screening Program Implemented in Primary Care.
Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Targeting Brain-Body Processes in Postural Tachycardia Syndrome: A Pilot Trial of POts Reprocessing Therapy.Research square · 2026Article
- Temporal pathways between alexithymia, psychological distress, and pain: An autoregressive mediation analysis.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2026Article
- Financial Barriers, Mental Health, and Medication Nonadherence Among Individuals With Chronic Pain.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- Feasibility and Preliminary Outcomes of a Brain/Body Intervention for Postural Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS): Pilot Trial of POts Reprocessing Therapy (PORT).Research square · 2026Article
- From Roots to Canopy: Understanding Chronic Pelvic Pain Through a Tree-Inspired Model.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- Integrative Treatment Strategies for Chronic Back Pain: A Literature Review with Clinical Recommendations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Longitudinal relationship between adverse childhood experiences and depressive symptoms: the mediating role of physical pain.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Predicting persistent back pain causing severe interference with daily activities among community-dwelling older adults: the OPAL cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Treating Anxiety-Based Cognitive Distortions Pertaining to Somatic Perception for Better Chronic Pain Outcomes: A Recommendation for Better Practice in the Present Day and the Cyber Age of Medicine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Sensors and Devices Guided by Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Pain Medicine.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Review
- Implementation and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Multidisciplinary Telemedicine Pilot Initiative for Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in Rural and Underserved Areas at a Major Academic Medical Center.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Feasibility and Acceptability of the Pain Profile, a Clinical Questionnaire Aimed at Improving Pain Care.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Article
- Review
- The association between chronic pain and pre-and-post migration experiences in resettled humanitarian refugee women residing in Australia.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Are Pain Screening and Functional Assessment Results Associated with New Diagnoses and Treatment for Pain in Primary Care? An Observational Study.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Although pain is among the most common symptoms reported by patients, primary care practitioners (PCPs) face substantial challenges identifying and assessing pain. Objective: To evaluate a 2-step process for chronic pain screening and follow-up in primary care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study of patients with a primary care visit between July 2, 2018, and June 1, 2019, was conducted at a statewide, multisite federally qualified health center. Participants included 68 PCPs and 58 medical assistants from 13 sites who implemented the screening process in primary care, and 38 866 patients aged 18 years or older with a primary care visit during that time. Exposures: Single-question assessment of pain frequency, followed by a 3-question PEG (pain, enjoyment of life, general activity) functional assessment for patients with chronic pain. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adherence to a 2-step chronic pain screening and PEG process, proportion of patients with positive screening results, mean PEG pain severity greater than or equal to 7, and documented chronic painful condition diagnosis in patient's electronic health record between 1 year before and 90 days after screening. Results: Of 38 866 patients with a primary care visit, 31 600 patients (81.3%) underwent screening. Mean (SD) age was 46.2 (15.4) years, and most were aged 35 to 54 years (12 987 [41.1%]), female (18 436 [58.3%]), Hispanic (14 809 [46.9%]), and English-speaking (22 519 [71.3%]), and had Medicaid insurance (18 442 [58.4%]). A total of 10 262 participants (32.5%) screened positive and, of these, 9701 (94.5%) completed the PEG questionnaire. PEG responses indicated severe pain interference with activities of daily living (PEG ≥7) in 5735 (59.1%) participants. A chronic painful condition had not been diagnosed in 4257 (43.9%) patients in the year before screening. A new chronic painful condition was diagnosed at screening or within 90 days in 2250 (52.9%) patients. Care teams found the workflow acceptable, but cited lengthy administration time, challenges with comprehension of the PEG questions, and limited comprehensiveness as implementation barriers. Conclusions and Relevance: A systematic, 2-step process for chronic pain screening and functional assessment in primary care appeared to identify patients with previously undocumented chronic pain and was feasible to implement. Patient-provided information on the frequency of pain, pain level, and pain interference can help improve the assessment and monitoring of pain in primary care.
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.