ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2021
What Is the Numerical Nature of Pain Relief?
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05336500 (Effectiveness of Education to Keep the Abdomen Relaxed Versus Contracted During Pilates Exercises in Patients With Primary Chronic Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Effectiveness of Education to Keep the Abdomen Relaxed Versus Contracted During Pilates Exercises in Patients With Primary Chronic Low Back Pain: a Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical hyperalgesia and neuropathic pain qualities impart risk for chronic postoperative pain after total knee replacement.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Effects of back school-based intervention on non-specific neck pain in adults: a randomized controlled trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pain relief, or a decrease in self-reported pain intensity, is frequently the primary outcome of pain clinical trials. Investigators commonly report pain relief in one of two ways: using raw units (additive) or using percentage units (multiplicative). However, additive and multiplicative scales have different assumptions and are incompatible with one another. In this work, we describe the assumptions and corollaries of additive and multiplicative models of pain relief to illuminate the issue from statistical and clinical perspectives. First, we explain the math underlying each model and illustrate these points using simulations, for which readers are assumed to have an understanding of linear regression. Next, we connect this math to clinical interpretations, stressing the importance of statistical models that accurately represent the underlying data; for example, how using percent pain relief can mislead clinicians if the data are actually additive. These theoretical discussions are supported by empirical data from four longitudinal studies of patients with subacute and chronic pain. Finally, we discuss self-reported pain intensity as a measurement construct, including its philosophical limitations and how clinical pain differs from acute pain measured during psychophysics experiments. This work has broad implications for clinical pain research, ranging from statistical modeling of trial data to the use of minimal clinically important differences and patient-clinician communication.
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.