ArticleBMJ open2024
Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in patients with cancer:a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of psychological interventions versus standard care for cancer pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Cancer pain.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026Review
- κ-Opioid Receptor Agonists as Robust Pain-Modulating Agents: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potential in Pain Modulation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cancer pain: molecular mechanisms and management.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPain management in patients with cancer is a critical aspect of oncological care, yet remains challenging with current pharmacological therapies. Non-pharmacological interventions, offering potential benefits without the adverse effects of drugs, have gained attention. However, the effectiveness of these diverse non-pharmacological interventions is not well understood, creating a gap in clinical practice. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy of various non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in patients with cancer, providing evidence-based guidance for clinicians and patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review and Bayesian NMA will be performed. To assess the efficacy of interventions for cancer pain, we will search six electronic databases: Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, focusing on identifying randomised controlled trials. Literature screening should be independently performed by two reviewers. A NMA will evaluate the efficacy of various non-pharmacological interventions for cancer pain. A second NMA will compare the efficacy of different non-pharmacological interventions in relieving pain interference in patients with cancer pain. Bayesian 95% credible intervals will be used to estimate the pooled mean effect size for each treatment, and the surface under the cumulative ranking area will be employed to rank the effectiveness of the treatments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review of the published data. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024483025.
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.