ReviewCureus2026
Machine Learning Applications for Opioid Use Management in Chronic Cancer Pain: A Systematic Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic pain remains a critical clinical issue worldwide, with adverse effects on the quality of life of oncology patients. Meanwhile, the overuse of opioids to treat or alleviate chronic cancer pain has contributed to a global opioid crisis. The increasing accessibility of high-quality clinical datasets and computational frameworks has promoted the use of machine learning (ML) techniques in clinical practice to manage opioid consumption. This review investigates the current bibliography referring to the role of applied ML techniques in opioid administration in patients with chronic cancer pain. The objective of the current scoping review, according to population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) standards, was to evaluate the effectiveness of ML techniques in monitoring opioid consumption in patients with chronic cancer pain. This review includes scientific journal papers published from 2010 to 2024 that use healthcare data from patients with chronic cancer pain, apply machine learning techniques, and may address the potential consequences of the misuse of opioids. A systematic literature search, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, was performed in PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Data extracted include the study's goal, dataset used, cohort selected, types of ML models created, model evaluation metrics, and the details of the ML tools and techniques used to create the models. After conducting the screening process, 50 articles were identified, but only four focused specifically on or included data of patients with chronic cancer pain where ML techniques were applied. The four included studies showed high performance (area under the curve {AUC}: >0.8) in predicting opioid adherence, misuse, and long-term use. Although generalizability remains limited due to small sample sizes and a lack of external validation, it sets distinct limits in applying these methods in clinical use. After a thorough review of recent literature, ML models demonstrated promising accuracy in predicting opioid adherence, misuse, and long-term use among patients with chronic cancer pain. However, these findings are based on studies with limited sample sizes and a lack of external validation, which restricts their generalizability. Future research should focus specifically on populations with chronic cancer pain and expand predictive models to incorporate a combination of clinical, psychosocial, biometric, and genomic data. This approach may enable more accurate, personalized, and safer opioid management in oncology care.
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.