Trial reportValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2026
Cost-Effectiveness of Remote Cognitive-Behavioral-Based Therapy for Chronic Pain Among People With High-Impact Chronic Pain.
Trial report in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAssess cost-effectiveness from the health plan perspective comparing 2 remote cognitive-behavioral-therapy-for-chronic-pain-based interventions (1) pain TRAINER online program and (2) health coach-led telehealth program relative to usual care (UC) and each other.
methodsCost-effectiveness analysis includes N = 1725 individuals with high-impact chronic pain from 3 Kaiser Permanente sites of RESOLVE randomized clinical trial. Costs were calculated for all healthcare and pain-related services. Clinical outcomes at 1-year included: quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in pain severity score (≥30% improvement).
resultsBoth cognitive-behavioral-therapy-for-chronic-pain-based interventions had significantly higher QALYs (painTRAINER: Adj Diff. = 0.035, P < .001; health coach: Adj Diff. = 0.041, P < .001) and proportion achieving MCID (painTRAINER: Adj Diff. = 14.1%, P < .001; health coach: Adj Diff. = 12.2%, P < .001) than UC. painTRAINER was dominant relative to UC (ie, less expensive and more effective) for both QALYs and MCIDs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for health coach vs UC was $19 009 per QALY and $6267 per MCID. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for health coach vs painTRAINER was $244 446 per QALY. Net benefit regression identified painTRAINER as the cost-effective choice across all willingness-to-pay levels. Sensitivity analyses, excluding overly influential outliers, demonstrated consistent results, and that health coach vs painTRAINER was cost-effective above willingness-to-pay of $120 000 per QALY.
conclusionAnalyses showed that both the painTRAINER and health coach programs are highly cost-effective relative to UC. Compared with each other, painTRAINER is more cost-effective than the health coach program.
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.