ArticleMedicine2025
Global trends and hotspots of randomized controlled trials in chronic pain therapy (1989-2024): A 35-year bibliometric analysis.
Article in Medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic pain persists as a significant global health challenge, underscoring the necessity for effective, evidence-based treatment strategies. This study aims to assess publication trends and identify research hotspots within randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to chronic pain therapy.
methodsWe conducted a bibliometric analysis utilizing data from Web of Science Core Collection, covering the period from January 1989 to September 2024. Eligible studies were extracted from, and analysis was performed by VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and R 4.3.3.
resultsOur analysis encompassed a total of 4206 publications sourced from 939 journals, authored by 20,068 individuals across 86 countries. The most cited document was "Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale." The USA led in both publication volume and citation frequency, followed by the UK and Canada. Harvard University emerged as the most prolific institution, with significant contributions from journals such as Pain and Pain Medicine. Notable authors included Moore R. Andrew and Manchikanti Laxmaiah. Keyword analysis revealed research hotspots in "low back pain," "management," and "double blind," while emerging research frontiers included "guidelines" and "hip," indicating areas for future inquiry.
conclusionThis bibliometric analysis of RCTs pertaining to chronic pain therapy elucidated trends and emergent themes within the field. The findings yield significant insights for clinical applications and serve as a reference for prospective research directions in chronic pain management. This analysis reveals a paradigm shift from pharmacological trials to multimodal interventions incorporating psychological outcomes.
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.