ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2026
[Professional development and job satisfaction in pain medicine].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPain medicine is an interdisciplinary and interprofessional field of specialisation. Due to concerns about new recruits and an aging workforce, especially among physicians, it is important to better understand professional and career pathways in pain medicine.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to record the occupational routes of people working in an institution specialised in pain medicine/pain management as well as their motivation and job satisfaction. MATERIALS AND
methodsA standardised online questionnaire was used to survey members via cooperating scientific societies and organisations.
resultsData from 398 physicians, 78 psychologists, 62 physiotherapists, three occupational therapists and 23 nursing professionals were included in the analysis. The age distribution skewed towards higher age groups, with the majority of respondents aged between 51 and 60 years. The respondents usually first came into clinical contact with pain medicine after many years of work. In the case of physicians in particular, there was a delay of almost a decade after their licence to practise. With regard to motivational factors, intrinsic aspects were rated higher than monetary ones. Work-life balance issues tended to be in the middle of the ranking. Regarding job satisfaction in pain medicine, the overall satisfaction of the respondents was high, with the lowest satisfaction ratings being given in the categories "opportunities for further career development", "additional income options" and "recognition by superiors". A significant proportion of respondents (1/3) stated that career changes were forthcoming-changes outside a pain medicine setting or in particular retirement.
conclusionsThe results emphasise the critical perspectives regarding the future provision of care for people with chronic pain. The results provide, for the first time, an insight into the career routes of staff in the field of pain medicine and their motivations and job satisfaction, which should be considered in the discussion about ensuring personnel resources in the future.
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.