ReviewJournal of pain research2026
A Scoping Review and Content Analysis of Available Chronic Pain Education Programs and Resources for Children, Adolescents and Young Adults with Diverse Abilities.
Review in Journal of pain research, 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
Approximately one-in-five children and adolescents experience chronic pain. Pain education, where people are provided with information, supports and skills to better manage pain, is a key component of effective pain management. This review identified and synthesised the content of existing chronic pain education programs/resources for individuals aged 5-25 years and examined their accessibility for those with diverse abilities. Searches of research databases, publicly available websites, and a global call for innovations identified 89 records representing 69 unique programs/resources. The most frequently referenced were "Web-based Management for Adolescent Pain (Web-MAP)", "The ComfortAbility Program", and "iCanCope with Pain". Programs/resources were analysed using content analysis and mapped to seven recommended chronic pain education categories (Partnerships, self-management skills, lifestyle habits, emotional coping, social role support, informed decisions, and explaining pain) and five accessibility domains (cognition, communication, vision, hearing and movement). Accessibility was assessed through content review by coding each resource for explicit or potential consideration of accessibility. Educational content was commonly delivered through websites or face-to-face sessions, and emerging digital approaches (including mobile applications, virtual reality, chatbots, podcasts, social media). Most delivery approaches were online and self-directed. Of the analysed programs/resources, only four addressed all seven recommended chronic pain education categories. The category most frequently addressed involved promoting active cognitive and behavioural strategies to improve function and reduce symptoms. Accessibility analysis suggested that while over half of the resources were likely suitable for individuals with diverse visual (56.5%), communication (82.6%), auditory (84.1%), or movement abilities (91.3%), accessibility for those with cognitive impairment was markedly underrepresented and by far the least addressed domain (14.5%). Overall, while many pain education programs and resources exist for young people with chronic pain, few address all recommended education domains. Future development should emphasise inclusive design and equitable accessibility, particularly cognitive accessibility, to ensure resources effectively meet diverse needs.
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.