Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38521656›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of anaesthesia2024

Pain after combat injury in male UK military personnel deployed to Afghanistan.

Jan Vollert, Alexander Kumar, Emma C Coady, Paul Cullinan, Daniel Dyball, Nicola T Fear, Zoe Gan, Eleanor F Miller, Stefan Sprinckmoller, Suzie Schofield and 6 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of anaesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Biases in the measurement of health-related quality of life in the EQ-5D-5L among those with serious physical traumatic injuries: the ADVANCE cohort study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Phantom Limb Pain Assessment Tools: A Literature Review Exploring Strengths and Limitations.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jan VollertDepartment of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK; Pain Research, MSk Lab, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: j.vollert@exeter.ac.uk.
Alexander KumarPain Research, MSk Lab, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK; Academic Department of Military Rehabilitation, Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre, Stanford Hall Estate, Loughborough, UK.
Emma C CoadyNational Heart and Lung Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paul CullinanNational Heart and Lung Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Daniel DyballKing's Centre for Military Health Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Nicola T FearKing's Centre for Military Health Research, King's College London, London, UK; Academic Department of Military Mental Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Zoe GanPain Research, MSk Lab, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Eleanor F MillerDepartment of Bioengineering, Faculty of Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Stefan SprinckmollerDepartment of Bioengineering, Faculty of Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Suzie SchofieldNational Heart and Lung Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alexander BennettAcademic Department of Military Rehabilitation, Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre, Stanford Hall Estate, Loughborough, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Anthony M J BullCentre for Blast Injury Studies, Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Christopher J BoosDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Dorset, NHS Trust, Poole, UK.
Andrew S C RicePain Research, MSk Lab, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK; Centre for Blast Injury Studies, Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Harriet I KempPain Research, MSk Lab, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
ADVANCE Study
Imperial College London · GBKing's College London · GBLung Institute · USPoole Hospital · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pain after injury poses a serious health burden. As a result of advances in medical technology, ever more military personnel survive severe combat injuries, but long-term pain outcomes are unknown. We aimed to assess rates of pain in a representative sample of UK military personnel with and without combat injuries.

methodsWe used data from the ADVANCE cohort study (ISRCTN57285353). Individuals deployed as UK armed forces to Afghanistan were recruited to include those with physical combat injuries, and a frequency-matched uninjured comparison group. Participants completed self-reported questionnaires, including 'overall' pain intensity and self-assessment of post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression.

resultsA total of 579 participants with combat injury, including 161 with amputations, and 565 uninjured participants were included in the analysis (median 8 yr since injury/deployment). Frequency of moderate or severe pain was 18% (n=202), and was higher in the injured group (n=140, 24%) compared with the uninjured group (n=62, 11%, relative risk: 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0-1.2, P<0.001), and lower in the amputation injury subgroup (n=31, 19%) compared with the non-amputation injury subgroup (n=109, 26%, relative risk: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.9-1.0, P=0.034). Presence of at least moderate pain was associated with higher rates of post-traumatic stress (RR: 3.7, 95% CI: 2.7-5.0), anxiety (RR: 3.2, 95% CI: 2.4-4.3), and depression (RR: 3.4, 95% CI: 2.7-4.5) after accounting for injury.

conclusionCombat injury, but not amputation, was associated with a higher frequency of moderate to severe pain intensity in this cohort, and pain was associated with adverse mental health outcomes.

Indexed as

Afghan Campaign 2001-Military PersonnelAdultAnxietyChronic PainCohort StudiesDepressionHumansMalePainPain MeasurementStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticUnited KingdomWounds and InjuriesYoung Adultamputationbattlefield injurypainphantom limb painveteran health

Identifiers

PMID38521656
PMCPMC11129277
OpenAlexW4393114881

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.