ReviewPaediatric & neonatal pain2024
A systematic review of in-person versus remotely delivered interventions for youth with chronic pain.
Review in Paediatric & neonatal pain, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the Intersecting Contexts of Migration and Pediatric Pain over the Last Decade: A Rapid Scoping Review Protocol.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Non-Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Psychological Interventions May Not Make the Difference in Children and Adolescents With Chronic Pain.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- A systematic review of in-person versus remotely delivered interventions for youth with chronic pain.Paediatric & neonatal pain · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a rapid shift from in-person to virtually-delivered care. Many youth with chronic pain have the ability to access care virtually; however, little is known about the efficacy of pain care for youth with chronic pain delivered virtually when compared to in-person. Such evidence is essential to guide youth in making decisions about their care, but also to inform what options health professionals present to youth. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of interventions that are delivered in-person versus virtually for youth with chronic pain. Five databases (i.e., CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were searched in October 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials that compare single/multimodal interventions for pediatric chronic pain delivered in-person versus virtually. A total 3638 unique studies were identified through database and other searching, two of which satisfied established criteria for inclusion in this review. Both studies compared psychological interventions delivered virtually versus in-person for youth with chronic pain and showed comparable efficacy across modalities. The planned meta-analyses could not be conducted due to different outcomes within each study that could not be combined. This systematic review highlights a critical gap in the evidence regarding the efficacy of virtually delivered interventions for youth with chronic pain. This evidence is necessary to inform treatment decisions for youth, and further research is required to develop the evidence to inform clinical interventions, especially as virtual treatments continue to be offered.
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.