ArticlePain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses2026
The Centralized Pain Score: A Method to Identify Nociplastic Pain in Electronic Health Records.
Article in Pain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses, 2026. 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
Abstract
introductionChronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs) are a group of pain conditions that often co-occur and present with challenging nociplastic pain. Individuals with COPCs describe clinician skepticism and prolonged diagnosis, leading to periods of inadequate pain treatment. The lack of methods to identify nociplastic pain in electronic health records (EHRs) limits large-scale studies of nociplastic pain trajectories and phenotyping that could improve treatment.
objectiveTo develop and validate the Centralized Pain Score (CPS) as a method for identifying nociplastic pain in EHR data.
methodsIn a large deidentified EHR database, the CPS, which sums central sensitization-weighted COPC ICD codes across individual records, was examined. Descriptive statistics were calculated for three groups: a General Population Group (N = 55,340), a group clinically determined to have nociplastic pain (Nociplastic Pain Group, N = 100), and an Age- and Sex-Matched Group (N = 500). T-tests were used to compare differences in CPS between pairs of these three groups. A post hoc content analysis of clinical documentation was conducted to examine the nomenclature of nociplastic pain.
resultsThe Nociplastic Pain Group demonstrated a CPS 8.6-fold higher (mean = 3.7, standard deviation [SD] = 2.9) than the General Population (mean = 0.43, SD = 1.0, p < .001) and 7.9-fold higher than the Age- and Sex-Matched Group (CPS mean = 0.47, SD = 1.1, p < .001). Nociplastic pain was most commonly documented as "central pain syndrome." DISCUSSION: Clinicians are documenting nociplastic pain and recommending interventions targeting centralized mechanisms. The CPS appears to capture nociplastic pain. The term central pain syndrome was not intended for nociplastic pain, but it is frequently used.
conclusionUsing the CPS to examine nociplastic pain could improve early detection of nociplastic pain conditions.
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.