Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42150838›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2026

Assessing central nervous system contributions to accelerate musculoskeletal pain diagnosis and treatment (AsCent): protocol for a mixed-method, prospective observational study.

Georgia Clay, Stevie Vanhegan, Caroline Abbott, Fiona A Pearce, Fiona Moffatt, Kirsty Bannister, Thomas Graven-Nielsen, David A Walsh, Stephanie L Smith

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06518278 (Assessing Central Nervous System Contributions to Accelerate Musculoskeletal Pain Diagnosis and Treatment), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06518278 active not recruitingnot on this map

Assessing Central Nervous System Contributions to Accelerate Musculoskeletal Pain Diagnosis and Treatment

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2024 to 2026Enrolled250ConditionsOsteoarthritis, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Low Back Pain, Inflammatory Arthritis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Georgia ClayPain Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Stevie VanheganIndependent Contributor, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Caroline AbbottIndependent Contributor, University of Nottingham, St Albans, UK.
Fiona A PearceSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Fiona MoffattPain Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0467-6860
Kirsty BannisterDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London - South Kensington Campus, London, UK.
Thomas Graven-NielsenCenter for Neuroplasticity and Pain (CNAP), Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
David A WalshPain Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Stephanie L SmithPain Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK STEPHANIE.SMITH2@NOTTINGHAM.AC.UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3365-0144

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionChronic musculoskeletal pain often extends beyond pathology alone. Augmented central pain processing is linked to pain severity, persistence and treatment outcomes. A practical clinical tool is needed to identify individuals likely to have persistent or worsening pain, likely due to augmented central pain mechanisms. Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) offers mechanistic insight, while the Central Aspects of Pain (CAP) Questionnaire captures symptom profiles that potentially reflect central mechanisms. Combining a brief clinical QST protocol with CAP may support early risk stratification and guide personalised pain management. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This prospective observational study will recruit 250 individuals with inflammatory arthritis, osteoarthritis, chronic low back pain or fibromyalgia from existing cohorts, primary or secondary care. Participants will complete validated patient-reported outcomes at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks, with no additional intervention. The risk stratification tool completed at baseline will include clinical QST (Pressure Pain Threshold, Temporal Summation of Pain, Conditioned Pain Modulation), tender point count and the CAP questionnaire. Baseline laboratory versions of the clinical QST, plus Heat Pain Threshold, Offset Analgesia and the Central Sensitisation Inventory short form-9 questionnaire, will provide pain profiling to evaluate the predictive validity and psychometric properties of the tool. Data collection will include demographics, medical history, cognitive and neurological assessments and sleep quality via actigraphy (Actigraph wGT3X-BT). Interviews with patients and healthcare professionals will inform refinement, feasibility and acceptability of the tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Yorkshire & The Humber-South Yorkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference number: 24/YH/1062). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and patient-facing summaries and podcasts. The study aims to develop a clinically feasible tool to identify individuals at risk of persistent or worsening pain due to augmented central pain processing, enabling targeted treatment strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06518278.

Indexed as

Central Nervous SystemChronic PainMusculoskeletal PainPain MeasurementFibromyalgiaHumansOsteoarthritisPain ManagementPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesBack painChronic PainMusculoskeletal disordersPAIN MANAGEMENTRHEUMATOLOGY

Identifiers

PMID42150838
PMCPMC13185045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.