ArticlePain reports2025
Optimising clinical trial methods for complex regional pain syndrome: a methodological framework (OptiMeth-CRPS).
Article in Pain reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Optimising clinical trial methods for complex regional pain syndrome: a methodological framework (OptiMeth-CRPS).Pain reports · 2025Article
- Exploring structural connectivity alterations in CRPS: Insights from diffusion imaging and clinical correlates.Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a rare, disabling pain disorder. Systematic reviews have identified a critical lack of high-quality clinical trial evidence to inform the management of CRPS. There is an urgent need to find solutions to the methodological challenges of undertaking clinical trials in CRPS. The aim of this project was to develop a methodological framework for optimising future clinical trials in CRPS (OptiMeth-CRPS). Methods: An international network with expertise in the lived experience of CRPS, CRPS trials and evidence synthesis, and rare disease trial methods developed the framework using an "Experience and expertise" approach through an iterative process of (1) online and face-to-face meetings, (2) reviewing and approving meeting notes, and (3) revising draft manuscripts to develop the framework. Results: The OptiMeth-CRPS methodological framework presents 9 key optimisation strategies for improving the methodological quality of CRPS trials. These include strategies for optimising (1) the trial team, (2) research questions, (3) trial governance and management, (4) trial design, (5) the trial population, (6) intervention and comparator groups, (7) trial outcomes, (8) data analysis, and (9) openness, transparency, and reporting. We highlight those optimisation strategies that specifically address the challenges of undertaking clinical trials in people with CRPS. Conclusion: A methodological framework for optimising clinical trials in CRPS has been developed. The OptiMeth-CRPS methodological framework may support the CRPS research community to undertake high-quality clinical trials and improve the quality of the evidence on which clinical decisions and guidelines for the management of CRPS are based.
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.