ReviewFrontiers in digital health2022
A systematic review and meta-analysis of digital application use in clinical research in pain medicine.
Review in Frontiers in digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and bayesian meta-analysis of medical devices used in chronic pain management.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Cost savings and quality-of-life gains associated with the use of an AI-powered digital tool for self-management of chronic pain based on a multicenter cohort study.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of virtual reality as a pain management intervention in outpatient physiotherapy practices: a qualitative analysis.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Development of a Digital Multimodal Pain Intervention (CHRONIC): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Evidence-Based Self-Management Strategies for Fibromyalgia: Foundations for Digital Therapeutic Applications.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Development, implementation and evaluation of a digital treatment for adolescents with chronic pain: a protocol for a multi-phase study.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Digital Therapeutics for Improving Effectiveness of Pharmaceutical Drugs and Biological Products: Preclinical and Clinical Studies Supporting Development of Drug + Digital Combination Therapies for Chronic Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Development of Quality of Life in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer Using a Patient Support Smartphone App: Prepost Interventional Study.JMIR cancer · 2023Article
- Acceptability of the eHealth Intervention Sustainable Worker Digital Support for Persons With Chronic Pain and Their Employers (SWEPPE): Questionnaire and Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Digital Therapeutics (DTx) Expand Multimodal Treatment Options for Chronic Low Back Pain: The Nexus of Precision Medicine, Patient Education, and Public Health.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
23 authors at 15 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Pain is a silent global epidemic impacting approximately a third of the population. Pharmacological and surgical interventions are primary modes of treatment. Cognitive/behavioural management approaches and interventional pain management strategies are approaches that have been used to assist with the management of chronic pain. Accurate data collection and reporting treatment outcomes are vital to addressing the challenges faced. In light of this, we conducted a systematic evaluation of the current digital application landscape within chronic pain medicine. Objective: The primary objective was to consider the prevalence of digital application usage for chronic pain management. These digital applications included mobile apps, web apps, and chatbots. Data sources: We conducted searches on PubMed and ScienceDirect for studies that were published between 1st January 1990 and 1st January 2021. Study selection: Our review included studies that involved the use of digital applications for chronic pain conditions. There were no restrictions on the country in which the study was conducted. Only studies that were peer-reviewed and published in English were included. Four reviewers had assessed the eligibility of each study against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Out of the 84 studies that were initially identified, 38 were included in the systematic review. Data extraction and synthesis: The AMSTAR guidelines were used to assess data quality. This assessment was carried out by 3 reviewers. The data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main outcomes and measures: Before data collection began, the primary outcome was to report on the standard mean difference of digital application usage for chronic pain conditions. We also recorded the type of digital application studied (e.g., mobile application, web application) and, where the data was available, the standard mean difference of pain intensity, pain inferences, depression, anxiety, and fatigue. Results: 38 studies were included in the systematic review and 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The digital interventions were categorised to web and mobile applications and chatbots, with pooled standard mean difference of 0.22 (95% CI: -0.16, 0.60), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.00, 0.60) and -0.02 (95% CI: -0.47, 0.42) respectively. Pooled standard mean differences for symptomatologies of pain intensity, depression, and anxiety symptoms were 0.25 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.46), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.17, 0.43) and 0.37 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.69), respectively. A sub-group analysis was conducted on pain intensity due to the heterogeneity of the results ( Conclusions and relevance: The use of digital applications in improving pain-related symptoms shows promise, but further clinical studies would be needed to develop more robust applications. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021228343.
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.