ArticleThe journal of pain2024
Comparable Minimally Important Differences and Responsiveness of Brief Pain Inventory and PEG Pain Scales across 6 Trials.
Article in The journal of pain, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intercostal nerve block with liposomal bupivacaine versus no regional analgesia after uniportal thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized controlled trial.JTCVS open · 2026Trial
- Ultrasound-Guided Infraspinatus-Teres Minor Interfascial Block versus Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Analgesia After Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Randomized Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Psychometric properties of the knee osteoarthritis pain index.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2025Trial
- A phase II pilot randomized controlled trial of an integrated stepped collaborative care intervention for patients awaiting kidney transplantation (CARES-transplant).Journal of behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled pilot study to assess the efficacy of erenumab in individuals with temporomandibular disorder.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2025Trial
- Care Models to Improve Pain and Reduce Opioids Among Patients Prescribed Long-Term Opioid Therapy: The VOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Article
- Age-stratified difference in patient-reported health-related quality of life following breast cancer surgery.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Integrating Behavioral Health Services for Individuals With Rheumatic Diseases: A Quantitative Analysis of a Pilot Study.ACR open rheumatology · 2026Article
- Article
- Chronic Pain and Distress in the Primary Care Setting: Implementing a Digital Pain and Distress Screener to Optimize Integrated Psychological Treatment.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2026Article
- Targeting Chronic Pain in Primary Care Settings Using Behavioral Health Consultants: A Pilot Study Implementing Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Pain.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2026Observational
- Examining the utility of process-focused data driven psychological networks for individualizing psychological treatment in chronic pain-A single case experiment testing the centrality hypothesis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block versus Thoracic Epidural Analgesia After Thoracotomy: A Randomized Controlled Assessor-Blinded Non-Inferiority Trial.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of a Stepped Model of Care for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Protocol for a Multiarm Randomized Controlled Trial (Edu-First Trial).JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Painfully Obvious? Non-Operative Drivers of Post-Operative Pain and Opioid Exposure in a Predominantly Emergency Surgical Cohort: A Multicentre Observational Study Identifying Non-Operative, Perioperative Pain Correlates.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Observational
- Mindfulness practice time and quality in veterans with chronic pain.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Chronic low back pain causal risk factors identified by Mendelian randomization: a cross-sectional cohort analysis.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2025Observational
- Article
- Use of Intervention Mapping to Adapt a Psychologically Informed Physical Therapy Telerehabilitation Intervention for Latino Persons With Chronic Spine Pain.The journal of pain · 2025Article
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
The 3-item pain intensity (P), interference with the enjoyment of life (E), and interference with general activity (G), or PEG, has become one of the most widely used measures of pain severity and interference. The minimally important differences (MID) and responsiveness of the PEG are essential metrics for solidifying its role in research and clinical care. The current study aims to establish the MID and responsiveness of the PEG by synthesizing data from 1,710 participants across 6 controlled trials. MIDs were estimated using absolute score changes among individuals reporting their pain was "a little better" on a retrospective global change anchor as well as distribution-based estimates using standard deviation thresholds and 1 and 2 standard errors of measurement. Responsiveness was assessed using standardized response means, area under the curve, and treatment effect sizes. MID estimates for the PEG ranged from 0.60 to 1.1 when using 0.35 SD, and 0.78 to 1.22 using 1 standard error of measurement. MID estimates using the global anchor had somewhat more variability but most estimates ranged from 1.0 to 1.75. Responsiveness effect sizes were generally large (>.80) for standardized response means and moderate (>.50) for treatment effect. Similarly, the most area under the curve values demonstrated an acceptable level of scale responsiveness (≥.70). Importantly, MID estimates and responsiveness of the PEG and BPI scales were largely comparable when aggregating data across trials. Our synthesis indicates that 1 point is a reasonable MID estimate on these 0- to 10-point pain scales, with 2 points being an upper bound. PERSPECTIVE: This article synthesizes data from 6 clinical trials to establish the minimally important difference (MID) and responsiveness of the 3-item PEG pain scale. The PEG demonstrated good responsiveness, and 1 to 2 points proved to be reasonable estimates for the lower and upper bounds of the MID.
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.