ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Development and External Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Pain Risk Post-Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Using Multi-Parameter Analysis.
Article in Journal of pain research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore factors associated with moderate-to-severe pain (NRS > 4) in patients undergoing ultrasound-guided transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB), and to establish and validate a nomogram model for risk assessment. Patients and Methods: This study included 520 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided TPB at the First People's Hospital of Lianyungang City from September 2022 to December 2024. A training group (n = 400) and a validation group (n = 120) were established based on the admission time. Data collection included demographics, admission comorbidities, laboratory tests, imaging examinations, biopsy data, anxiety scores, and pain scores. Binary logistic regression was used to identify factors influencing moderate-to-severe pain (NRS > 4). A nomogram-based risk assessment model was constructed, with a validation model created to verify the training group. Additionally, a web-based dynamic nomogram risk assessment model was developed, and 120 patients from external hospitals were included for external validation. Results: Univariate analysis identified factors with statistical significance. Based on binary Logistic regression analysis, prostate volume, anxiety score, history of diabetes, biopsy time, and number of biopsy needles were risk factors, while age was a protective factor (P < 0.05). The nomogram-based risk assessment model demonstrated favorable predictive accuracy, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.940 [95% CI: 0.914-0.967] in the training group and 0.893 [95% CI: 0.834-0.951] in the internal validation group. External validation further confirmed robust predictive capability (AUC = 0.888 [95% CI: 0.825-0.951]). Additionally, decision curve analysis indicated clinically meaningful net benefits. Conclusion: This nomogram-based risk stratification tool offers a robust framework for personalized perioperative pain management in patients undergoing TPB. Furthermore, external validation further supports the model's applicability.
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.