ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2026
Development and Validation of the Brief Inventory of Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain (BITEC).
Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07673874 (Turkish Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability of the "Brief Inventory of Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain"), which is not on this 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.
Turkish Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability of the "Brief Inventory of Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain" (BITEC) Scale
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Botulinum Toxin A Injection Versus Placebo as Treatment for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Evaluating the Influence of Patients' Pretreatment Expectations.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of the Brief Inventory of Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain (BITEC).European journal of pain (London, England) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExpectations shape therapeutic outcomes, yet their systematic assessment remains limited in clinical and research settings. To address this gap, we developed and validated the Brief Instrument for the Assessment of Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain (BITEC) using Item Response Theory.
methodsThe study comprised four phases. (I) Twenty-one items were generated from expectation constructs and refined to 11 through a Delphi review (≥ 80% agreement). (II) Comprehensibility was tested in 30 women with fibromyalgia, and the scale was applied to 484 chronic pain patients; items (0-10) were recoded into four categories, and IRT reduced them to nine. (III) The final version was administered to 1127 adults with chronic pain (79.3% fibromyalgia; 20.7% nociceptive/neuropathic), and latent-class modelling defined low-high expectation cutoffs. (IV) Construct validity was assessed via discriminant analyses in calibration (n = 1127) and validation (n = 242) samples to evaluate whether BITEC levels differentiated diagnostic groups, pain impact and catastrophizing. (V) We developed a bedside app to support expectation-level classification.
resultsThe nine-item BITEC showed discrimination between high and low expectations (AUC 0.915; 95% CI 0.897-0.933; sensitivity 79%, specificity 96%). Across both samples, BITEC demonstrated construct validity, distinguishing expectation categories based on symptom severity, catastrophizing and pain burden. Expectation levels varied across pain phenotypes, decreasing from nociceptive pain (56.1%) to fibromyalgia (42.7%) and multiple pain conditions (26.9%). Higher symptom severity was associated with higher expectations.
conclusionBITEC is a brief, reliable, theory-grounded instrument for stratifying treatment expectations in chronic pain; applicability across treatment modalities and clinical contexts warrants further investigation. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Expectations strongly shape therapeutic outcomes but remain difficult to measure. The BITEC, a brief IRT-based tool, offers a reliable way to classify treatment expectations in chronic pain, supporting personalised care and improving clinical decision-making.
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.