ArticleMusculoskeletal science & practice2025
Pain science knowledge among healthcare Professionals: A cross-sectional survey within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.
Article in Musculoskeletal science & practice, 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.
- Understanding the Evidence-to-Practice Gap in Persistent Pain Management.Pain research & management · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPain complaints are one of the primary reasons that military veterans seek healthcare within the United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA). VHA providers therefore need to be able to appropriately identify and classify clinical pain presentations and provide evidence-based management strategies.
objectiveThe objective of this exploratory quality improvement (QI) project was to identify gaps in pain science knowledge across healthcare professionals who participate in the pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of pain within the United States VHA.
designCross-sectional survey. RESULTS/
findingsHealthcare providers (n = 311; 2 % response rate) representing 17 professions completed the survey. Significant between group difference was demonstrated by profession (H = 23.46; p < .001), and by provider age (H = 65.29; p < .001) in self-reported confidence measures and revised neurophysiology of pain (rNPQ) scores (p < .001). None of the professions reported confidence identifying/treating nociplastic pain and a single profession (pharmacists) reported confidence differentiating between pain phenotypes. Overall, the mean rNPQ score was 9.0 out of 12. Physical therapists (9.9) and psychologists (9.2) scored highest while nurse practitioners (7.3) and clinical social workers (7.6) scored lowest. Individuals 31-40 years old scored the highest (9.0) while individuals greater than 60 years old scored the lowest (7.2).
conclusionPain knowledge within the VHA varies by profession and age. Educational opportunities within the VHA should be catered towards professions likely to benefit the most, including non-physician primary care providers. Educational opportunities should focus on terminology, differentiating between pain phenotypes, and understanding nociplastic pain phenotypes.
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.