ArticleBritish journal of pain2026
Who is providing pain care? Mapping chronic pain services across Scotland using freedom of information requests.
Article in British journal of pain, 2026. 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.
- Mapping the gaps: Multi-disciplinary chronic pain service provision for cancer-related pain across England.British journal of pain · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Scottish Service Model for Chronic Pain advocates multidisciplinary provision of care, stratified across sectors. However, there is lack of transparency over staffing capacities and provisions. Method: We submitted Freedom of Information requests to the 14 regional Scottish Health Boards in September 2024. We conducted descriptive quantitative and qualitative analysis of responses. Findings: We received 13 responses from 14 Health Boards with varying levels of detail. We found that staff groups most commonly reported to provide dedicated care for chronic pain are: medicine, physiotherapy, psychology and nursing, with lower levels of occupational therapy and pharmacy provision. Six Boards reported at least 1.0 whole-time equivalent medical, physiotherapy and psychology staffing capacity per 500,000 population, with sparse provisions by some populous Boards, showing considerable variation. A variety of pain groups were reported. Boards with higher levels of multidisciplinary staffing and group provision tended to report a dedicated management resource. We found several examples of cross-sectoral connections, potentially improving access to pain care according to need at the local level. The most variable and least well-developed responses were to the question on equitable delivery of care, demonstrating need to improve delivery of equitable approaches and strategies to pain care. Conclusions: We used FOI requests to collect data on chronic pain staffing capacity showing considerable variation across Scotland. There are limitations to this method; it is likely that our findings do not show a complete picture, rather useful insights into activities and provisions of services for pain care across Scotland.
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.