ArticleBMJ open2023
Differences in chronic pain prevalence between men and women at mid-life: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unfiltered chronic pain: Insights from women of color through a virtual photovoice study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Sex Differences in the Prevalence of Chronic Pain in Mid-Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- The Burden of Chronic Pain on Women: A Secondary Analysis of Data From the National Study on Disability (ENDISC) in Chile.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Article
- Neuropathic Symptoms and Frequency of Chronic Pain in an International Online Sample of Individuals with Sub-Acute and Chronic Stroke.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Sex Differences in Pain Scores and Medication Consumption for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Attitudes and Experiences of Patients Regarding Gender-Specific Aspects of Pain Management.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Novel Insight into the Association between Balneotherapy and Functional State and Health Perception in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- eHealth-Integrated Psychosocial and Physical Interventions for Chronic Pain in Older Adults: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEpidemiological literature shows differences in chronic pain (CP) prevalence in men and women. Women are more likely to develop CP at different points of the life course, such as adolescence and old age. Less is known about the prevalence of CP by sex and the difference in prevalence during mid-life, when changes may predispose to an earlier differentiation in CP distribution. The aim of this study is to describe the difference in prevalence of CP at mid-life (ages 40-60) in men and women in the general population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Appropriate studies will be identified in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED and PsycINFO. Two reviewers will independently screen each title and abstract. Studies eligible for data extraction will report estimates of CP prevalence for each sex, and/or a measure of the difference in prevalence between sexes. The findings will be reported in a narrative synthesis following the Social Research Council Methods Programme guidelines. A random effects meta-analysis will be conducted where the reviewers can justify combining results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will summarise the prevalence of CP in men and women at mid-life, based on existing evidence. It is expected that the results will identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further research. The review will be submitted for publication in topic specific journals and disseminated to professional networks. Individual patient data are not included, so ethical approval is not required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021295895.
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.