ArticleCanadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur2023
Continuing professional development needs in pain management for Canadian health care professionals: A cross sectional survey.
Article in Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chronic opioid prescription rates following long-segment lumbar instrumentation: A comparison of academic and nonacademic centers.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- Perception and practice of primary health care professionals regarding chronic pain: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- "CARING in Action": A Knowledge Mobilization Project on Co-Creating Evidence-Based Communication Training in Chronic Pain Care for Healthcare Professionals.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2026Article
- Understanding Practitioner Comfort and Educational Priorities for Safe Opioid Prescribing: A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Nurses' Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Pain Assessment and Management: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing research and practice · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators to effective pain management in elderly Arab patients: a nursing perspective through a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Evolving Project ECHO: delivery of pediatric pain core competency learning for interprofessional healthcare providers.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, 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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Continuing professional development is an important means of improving access to effective patient care. Although pain content has increased significantly in prelicensure programs, little is known about how postlicensure health professionals advance or maintain competence in pain management. Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate Canadian health professionals' continuing professional development needs, activities, and preferred modalities for pain management. Methods: This study employed a cross-sectional self-report web survey. Results: The survey response rate was 57% (230/400). Respondents were primarily nurses (48%), university educated (95%), employed in academic hospital settings (62%), and had ≥11 years postlicensure experience (70%). Most patients (>50%) cared for in an average week presented with pain. Compared to those working in nonacademic settings, clinicians in academic settings reported significantly higher acute pain assessment competence (mean 7.8/10 versus 6.9/10; Conclusions: Canadian postlicensure health professionals require greater access to and participation in interactive and multimodal methods of continuing professional development to facilitate competency in evidence-based pain management.
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.