ArticleCancer medicine2025
Integrative Management of Cancer Pain: A Scoping Review of the Literature.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Fibromyalgia in cancer patients: a systematic review and clinical implications for integrated care.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Association of a standardized painless ward model with cancer pain control and hospitalization outcomes: a retrospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer-related pain is common and debilitating. Patients frequently use integrative medicine therapies to manage this, though safety and efficacy evidence is incomplete. This scoping review aims to characterize the state of integrative cancer pain therapy (ICPT) and identify priorities for future research.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane for ICPT studies published between January 1, 1975 and May 26, 2022. Study findings were extracted and analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Interventions were categorized as follows: Whole Systems of Medicine (WSM); Mind-body Medicine (MBM); Botanicals and Supplements (BAS); and Manual Therapies (MT). Quality appraisal was performed using the Downs and Black checklist. Efficacy was "positive" if there were statistically significant differences between study arms (p < 0.05) favoring ICPT.
resultsAmong 1246 studies reviewed, 151 met inclusion criteria; 63.5% were excellent or good quality, and 68.9% were RCTs; 122 studies (80.7%) were published since 2010. Studies occurred in 24 countries, in variable settings, among participants with a wide range of cancers, disease status, and age ranges. Studies investigating WSM and MBM interventions were most frequent (35.7% for each), MT (20.59%), and BAS (7.9%). Overall, of the included studies, 127 (84.1%) found that the ICPT intervention reduced pain.
conclusionsStudies on ICPT are increasingly common, and the majority of ICPT interventions demonstrated a positive impact on cancer pain. Future rigorous research should compare efficacy across integrative and biomedical interventions and explore how to incorporate evidence-based ICPT into standard cancer treatment.
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.