ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2025
Volunteer Peer Support for Chronic Pain Self-Management: A Qualitative Study of Benefits and Barriers.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of chronic pain on the families of U.S. adults.Pain reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPain self-management is a key ingredient in chronic pain management. Peer support has been shown to be effective in helping patients self-manage other chronic conditions and may be a promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs more broadly without placing additional demands on clinicians. The Evaluation of a Peer Coach-Led Intervention to Improve Pain Symptoms (ECLIPSE) trial tested peer-supported chronic pain self-management. Although peers may be paid staff or volunteers, the ECLIPSE intervention was delivered by volunteer peer coaches, to test a low-resource model that could be easily implemented if effective. Trial results showed no statistically significant differences between intervention and control participants on key outcomes, and intervention adherence was low.
objectiveTo understand participants' experiences with peer coaching to help explain trial results.
designSemi-structured qualitative interviews with participants and peer coaches.
participantsVeterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. KEY
resultsBenefits to intervention participation included connecting with fellow veterans, receiving encouragement and hope, and improving pain self-management. Peer coaches described benefits unique to their role: facilitating their own pain self-management, having a "positive distraction," and a sense of "giving back." Barriers included difficulties reaching participants; resistance to focusing on the curriculum, including prioritizing socializing and being unwilling to set pain management goals; and phone delivery, which impeded communication and rapport-building.
conclusionsParticipants described benefitting from the ECLIPSE intervention. Challenges, mostly related to engagement, were also described and may help explain trial results. The low-resource nature of the intervention may have exacerbated these difficulties. Volunteer coaches typically receive less training than paid peers and may have been less prepared to handle challenges; moreover, as volunteers, peer coaches likely had competing demands that left less time for coaching. Future research should seek to identify whom to target for peer-led versus other types of interventions to maximize benefit and use of resources.
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.