ArticleInterventional pain medicine2026
Access to interventional therapies for cancer pain: An exploratory survey of cancer pain experts.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Perioperative Care in Oncologic Surgical Cases: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Referral patterns and requested interventions in a cancer pain e-consult system.Interventional pain medicine · 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
Abstract
Background: The substantial health burdens and prevalence of cancer-related pain both during and after treatment underscore the need for expanded access to cancer pain specialists and therapeutic pain treatments. Despite growing demand, cancer pain specialists face substantial barriers to providing effective care. Objective: This exploratory study sought to characterize perspectives from a small group of international pain experts to examine patterns of utilization and perceived accessibility of interventional therapies across cancer types and clinical practice settings. Methods: An international, anonymous survey of cancer pain experts, identified via rigorous definition criteria, was conducted using the Qualtrics platform. The survey evaluated eight cancer-related pain categories: head and neck cancer, pleural and rib-based lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, pelvic cancer, lumbosacral spine cancer, extremity cancer, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, and bone metastases. Respondents were asked to indicate which treatments they currently use for each type of cancer and which they would use if they had access to them. Results: Cancer pain experts reported limited access to procedures with greater complexity. Some procedures had substantial variability in use and accessibility, specifically SCS, ITDD, permanent PNS, and nucleus tractus cordotomy. Complementary and alternative therapies were desirable but largely unavailable, particularly in academic settings. Conclusion: Despite the growing need for cancer pain management, specialists continue to face substantial barriers to delivering effective care. This exploratory survey of cancer pain experts identified patterns of reported use and access limitations for therapies across cancer types and practice settings. These findings suggest a relationship between procedural complexity and access barriers, with utilization and availability shaped by institutional resources and practice settings.
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.