Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38089861›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023

Developing consensus on core outcome sets of domains for acute, the transition from acute to chronic, recurrent/episodic, and chronic pain: results of the INTEGRATE-pain Delphi process.

Giulia Bova, Anthony Domenichiello, Janelle E Letzen, Daniela C Rosenberger, Andrew Siddons, Ulrike Kaiser, Adam Anicich, Ralf Baron, Judy Birch, Didier Bouhassira and 19 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists for chronic pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Cognitive-behavioural treatment for neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Response to De Paepe et al.Pain reports · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors.

Giulia BovaNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Anthony DomenichielloNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Janelle E LetzenNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Daniela C RosenbergerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Andrew SiddonsNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Ulrike KaiserUniversity Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Germany.
Adam AnicichNational Institutes of Health-Department of Defense-Veterans Affairs (NIH-DoD-VA) Pain Management Collaboratory (PMC), United States.
Ralf BaronDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany.
Judy BirchPelvic Pain Support Network, United Kingdom.
Didier BouhassiraInserm U987, UVSQ, Paris-Saclay University, Ambroise Pare Hospital, 92100, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
George CaseyOutcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), United States.
Katie GoldenCoalition for Headache and Migraine Patients (CHAMP), United States.
Smriti IyengarNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Barbara I KarpNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Hiltrud LiedgensGruenenthal GmbH, Aachen, Germany.
Winfried MeissnerUniversity Hospital Jena, Germany.
Kate NicholsonNational Pain Advocacy Center, United States.
Leah PogorzalaNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Deirdre RyanPain Alliance Europe, Ireland.
Rolf-Detlef TreedeDepartment of Neurophysiology, MCTN, Medical Faculty Mannheim of Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Peter TugwellDept of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Canada.
Dennis C TurkUniversity of Washington, United States.
Katy VincentUniversity of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Jan VollertDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Paula R WilliamsonMRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Sarah A WollerNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Ruth ZaslanskyUniversity Hospital Jena, Germany.
Laura D WandnerNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), United States.
Esther M Pogatzki-ZahnDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide among adults and effective treatment options remain elusive. Data harmonization efforts, such as through core outcome sets (COS), could improve care by highlighting cross-cutting pain mechanisms and treatments. Existing pain-related COS often focus on specific conditions, which can hamper data harmonization across various pain states. Methods: Our objective was to develop four overarching COS of domains/subdomains (i.e., Findings: Domains in final COS were generally related to aspects of pain, quality of life, and physical function/activity limitations, with some differences among pain categories. This effort was the first to generate four separate, overarching COS to encourage international data harmonization within and across different pain categories. Interpretation: The adoption of the COS in research and clinical practice will facilitate comparisons and data integration around the world and across pain studies to optimize resources, expedite therapeutic discovery, and improve pain care. Funding: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Join Undertaking; European Union Horizon 2020 research innovation program, European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) provided funding for IMI-PainCare. RDT acknowledges grants from Esteve and TEVA.

Indexed as

Acute painChronic painCore outcome setsDelphi methodRecurrent/episodic painTransition from acute to chronic pain

Identifiers

PMID38089861
PMCPMC10711484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.