Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40827008›Full record

ReviewArthritis care & research2026

Considerations for Issues of Regression to the Mean and Contextual Effects in Clinical Trials for Pain in Rheumatic Diseases.

Yen T Chen, Guohao Zhu, Afton L Hassett, Daniel Clauw, Susan L Murphy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arthritis care & research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

5 authors.

Yen T ChenUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0001-7723-6431
Guohao ZhuUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0002-1379-3914
Afton L HassettUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0003-2982-484X
Daniel ClauwUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0002-8114-7818
Susan L MurphyUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0001-7924-0012

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, there has been growing discussion about how to best assess pain in clinical trials in rheumatic diseases. Reliable measurement of pain outcomes is essential for accurately determining the effectiveness of treatments. Although pain intensity is the most common measure of change in pain trials, other pain-related measures, such as pain interference, are also frequently assessed. Interpreting treatment effects on these outcomes can be complicated due to statistical phenomena, particularly regression to the mean and contextual effects. These issues can substantially distort clinical trial findings, potentially leading to inaccurate conclusions about the efficacy of interventions. The present article provides an overview of regression to the mean and contextual effects, emphasizing their implications for internal validity, clinical decision-making, and ethical considerations in trials. Additionally, this article highlights key study design and analysis considerations, including methodologic and statistical approaches, that researchers can implement to mitigate or better account for these challenges. Practical recommendations are offered to enhance the rigor of pain assessment, with specific attention to osteoarthritis as a representative example within rheumatic disease research. By recognizing and addressing regression to the mean and contextual effects proactively, researchers can strengthen trial outcomes, improve clinical interpretations, and support the identification of effective treatments.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPain MeasurementResearch DesignRheumatic DiseasesData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40827008
PMCPMC12826090

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.