ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2026
Pain assessment tools in patients with substance use disorders: a systematic scoping review.
Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 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
Abstract
backgroundChronic pain and substance use disorders (SUD) frequently co-occur and are associated with poorer treatment outcomes. The way pain is measured affects which patients are identified as having clinically meaningful pain, which functional consequences are linked to substance use outcomes, and whether findings can be compared across studies or translated into care. Pain measurement practices in SUD research have not been systematically mapped.
methodsWe conducted a systematic scoping review of studies from 1990 to 2025 that reported pain assessment in SUD populations, including opioid, alcohol, tobacco, stimulant, and polysubstance use disorders. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We extracted data on pain assessment tools, substance use categories, SUD-specific psychometric evaluation, and coverage of eight NIH HEAL Pain Common Data Element domains: intensity, interference, location, physical functioning, quality of life, psychological factors, sleep disturbance, and treatment satisfaction.
resultsNinety-six studies (25,872 participants; mean per study 269, median 113) met inclusion criteria. Most used unidimensional pain intensity measures. Pain intensity scales appeared in 91% of studies, but only 14.6% reported SUD-specific psychometric evaluation. Pain interference, location, and treatment satisfaction were assessed in fewer than 60% of studies, and 11.5% assessed at least six of the eight NIH HEAL domains. Randomized controlled trials assessed more domains on average than cross-sectional studies. Studies focusing on opioid use disorder (OUD) more often used multidimensional tools than studies of alcohol, tobacco, stimulant, or polysubstance use. In the subset of studies that examined pain-substance use relationships, pain interference more often showed stronger associations with substance use outcomes than pain intensity alone.
conclusionsPain assessment in SUD research relies largely on unidimensional intensity scales. Substance Use Disorder specific validation is infrequent, and multidimensional pain domains are not consistently used. Brief multidimensional assessment approaches and systematic psychometric evaluation of pain measures in SUD populations are needed to improve the accuracy and clinical usefulness of pain measurement in research and treatment. We propose a candidate framework and minimum set for such studies.
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.