Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40170347›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025

Conversational Agents to Support Pain Management: A Scoping Review.

Filipe L Souza, Hannah Bowman, Francis Yang, Negin Hesam-Shariati, Jackson Linke, Yannick L Gilanyi, Matthew D Jones, Rafael Z-Pinto, James H McAuley, Rodrigo R N Rizzo

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Filipe L SouzaSchool of Health Sciences, University of Vale Do Itajaí, Itajaí, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3009-308X
Hannah BowmanCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Francis YangCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Negin Hesam-ShariatiSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jackson LinkeCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Yannick L GilanyiCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Matthew D JonesCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rafael Z-PintoCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
James H McAuleyCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rodrigo R N RizzoCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Australia & New Zealand Low Back Pain (ANZBACK) Research Network - NHMRC Centre of Research ExcellenceAustralia & New Zealand Low Back Pain Research Network
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain-related conditions are the leading cause of years lived with disability globally. Managing pain presents significant challenges, including the need to address multiple biopsychosocial factors and the difficulty in delivering evidence-based treatments. Digital health technologies, such as conversational agents, offer the potential for personalised and accessible pain management. However, the characteristics and effectiveness of these interventions are not yet fully understood. This scoping review aims to comprehensively evaluate the applications and effectiveness of conversational agents in supporting pain management in adults (i.e., healthy individuals at risk of developing pain, individuals currently experiencing pain and healthcare providers or students involved in managing pain conditions).

methodsSearches were systematically conducted across six databases-MEDLINE PubMed, ACM Digital Library, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL-and five trial registries from inception.

resultsTwenty-eight studies were included, focusing on capturing health information (n = 8), providing emotional support (n = 7), facilitating adherence to self-management exercises (n = 6), delivering psychological treatment (n = 5), offering organisational support (n = 1) and educating healthcare providers (n = 1). These studies addressed conditions with pain as a central or common symptom, including dementia (n = 7), cancer (n = 5) and musculoskeletal disorders (n = 4), among others. None of the conversational agents on the market covered all four stages recommended for translational research (development, feasibility, effectiveness and implementation).

conclusionThe use of conversational agents in pain management is relatively new and involves diverse and promising appllications. However, evidence supporting their effectiveness in improving pain-related outcomes remains limited and heterogeneous. Future reseacrh should prioritise feasibility, reliability, and user experience studies to inform the design of robust randomised controlled trials. SIGNIFICANCE: This scoping review comprehensively examines the use of conversational agents (CAs) in adult pain management. The study identified six applications of CAs to support pain management and highlights a lack of high-quality randomised controlled trials, particularly those preceded by development and feasibility studies. Clinicians and researchers can use these insights to guide future studies and improve applications of CAs in pain management.

Indexed as

CommunicationGenerative Artificial IntelligencePain ManagementHumansSelf-Managementartificial intelligenceartificial intelligence assistantschatbotconversational agentspain managementreview

Identifiers

PMID40170347
PMCPMC11962237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.