ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2025
An application of matching algorithms to generalize small-area estimates of chronic pain prevalence to neighbourhoods across England.
Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLocal decision-makers lack granular data on the prevalence of chronic pain in their populations. We applied matching methods to generalize estimates from one local survey in England to other neighborhoods across the country with a similar sociodemographic composition.
methodsWe used propensity score matching to match lower-layer super output areas (LSOA) across England with 230 surveyed LSOAs in North Staffordshire by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, and rurality. LSOA-specific crude prevalence of chronic pain and high-impact chronic pain in adults aged 35+ years were estimated and mapped for matched LSOAs.
resultsSatisfactory matching was achieved for 24 871 of 31 580 LSOAs (79%). The 6709 LSOAs identified as either "off common support" or unmatched were principally inner-city neighborhoods with younger, more ethnically diverse populations. LSOA-specific estimates of chronic pain and high impact chronic pain ranged from 14% to 52% and from 4% to 31% respectively. Integrated Care Board estimates ranged from 27% to 38% and from 10% to 18%, respectively. Estimates for England were 31.9% and 12.6%, respectively.
conclusionsUsing matching methods we have produced the first detailed map of the distribution of chronic pain in England but with several strong assumptions. Our estimates highlight substantial variation in prevalence within ICBs.
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.