ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2025
Investigating the Prevalence and Level of Pain Experienced by Australian Farmers.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 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.
- Co-Designing a Consumer-Centred Educational Resource to Assist Australian Farmers with the Management of Persistent Pain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluated the prevalence and level of pain in Australian farmers and how these compare to the general working population. We also explored factors related to the interference of pain on farmers' work.
designLogistic regressions were used to examine the prevalence of chronic pain and pain interference with normal work among farmers compared to the general working population, and also to examine the factors associated with pain interference in farmers. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to examine the level of bodily pain among farmers compared to the general working population.
settingThe nationally representative HILDA (Household, Income, and Labour Dynamics Australia) survey data (wave 21) was used.
participantsThe final sample included 168 (1.6%) farmers and 10 318 (98.4%) people in the general working population.
resultsThere was a higher prevalence of chronic pain (p < 0.001), higher levels of bodily pain (p < 0.001), and pain interference with normal work (p < 0.001) in farmers than in the general working population. Age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), education level, remoteness, and personal social cohesion were not associated with pain interference with normal work in farmers.
conclusionThe prevalence of chronic pain, level of bodily pain, and pain interference with normal work in Australian farmers is higher than the general working population. However, information is lacking on the factors that influence pain for this unique group. Further exploration is needed into why factors that are commonly associated with pain are not associated with pain in the farming population.
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.